ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ROCKY MOUNTAIN-PRAIRIE REGION
ANALYSIS 1975
STATE 305(B) REPORTS
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
Denver, Colorado
October 1975

-------
REGION VIII

-------
** \tT-
OolZ
?-•
ANALYSIS OF 1975
STATE 305(b) REPORTS
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION VIII
Denver, Colorado
on BUD®
.October 1975

-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter	Page
Introduction and Summary ___________ i
SUMMARY 	 2
Table 1	__________	--3
I.	Current Water Quality Summary and Trends _ _ _ _ 5
Table 2 (Colorado (- Wyoming) ------ — - -9
Figure 1 (Regional) --------------
II.	Control Programs and Water Quality Goals _ - _ _ 17
COLORADO 			 17
Figure 2 (Colorado)
MONTANA			21
Figure 3 (Montana)
NORTH DAKOTA 	24
Figure 4 (North Dakota)
SOUTH DAKOTA				26
Figure 5 (South Dakota)
III.	Costs and Benefits of Meeting Water Quality Goals-34
IV.	Non-Point Sources - - -	„35~
Figure 6 (Utah)
WYOMING - ^ ^ ^ ^
Figure 7 (Wyoming)

-------
Introduction and Summary
The purpose of this report is to transmit the Colorado, Montana,
North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming water quality assess-
ments "with an analysis thereof" to the EPA Headquarters for its use
in preparing a report to the Congress pursuant to Section 305(b) (2)
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, P.L.
92-500. States prepared and submitted timely reports which are hereby
forwarded. This submittal represents the first statewide assessment
undertaken pursuant to P.L. 92-500. Policy questions that could not
or, for data reasons, were not answered in this submittal will serve
as a basis for the future reports.
Water quality management plans served as the cornerstone for
most State 305(b) reports. The limitations found in 305(b) reports
therefore reflect those found in 303(e) basin plans. As Phase II of
the basin planning effort materializes, policy questions related to
costs, non-point sources, and goals will undoubtedly be quantified
so that policy questions can be answered with increasing assurance.
ST0RET and other state water quality data, information from the
permit, construction grant and Operation and Maintenance programs,
and specific localized technical analyses of ambient water quality
problems provided additional sources of data.
Water quality trends of the Region's largest streams were
analyzed by the EPA Regional Office and the results presented in
Chapter I and II.
1

-------
SUMMARY
The following summary follows in numerical order the questions
posed in Table 1.
1.	Based upon the review of State reports and EPA analyses of main-
stem streams, water quality in Region VIII can be classified as
generally very good, with noteworthy exceptions. Stream seg-
ments below metropolitan areas and those impacted by severe non-
point sources comprise the two classes of exceptions. A preven-
tive strategy is needed to assure that existing high quality
waters do not deteriorate because of further developments. Area-
wide planning, the NEPA process, interagency planning coordination,
management of non-point sources, and strong enforcement mechanisms
are needed to maintain a preventive posture. Many watercourse
segments are projected to meet goals assuming strong preventive
measures, especially those related to non-point source controls.
2.	Most states identified the impact of their programs over the last
five years. EPA's analysis showed that violations of oxygen re-
lated and bacterial indicators were diminishing, indicating the
effectiveness of the construction grant program and the early
stages of the permit program.
3.	All States identified the present use made of their surface waters.
J
4.	Only Wyoming indicated what uses the States' waters would support
when P.L. 92-500 provisions were fully implemented. For the
waters analyzed, all were projected to meet goals of fishable
and swimmable water quality.
5.	Wyoming identified in what places future uses would differ from
the goals of fishable and swimmable waters.
6.	The costs of achieving future uses were not presented in the re-
ports. Colorado, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota provided
municipal construction costs. Industrial and agricultural costs
were generally not available. The cost estimate of meeting 1983
goals has not improved over that developed in the 1974 Needs Survey.
7.	Four states identified where and to what extent non-point sources
would prevent the meeting of future uses set forth in the Act.
Most States see non-point sources as the major cause of water
quality problems. For example, Montana estimated that 3000 miles
of stream were degraded by non-point sources. This accounted for
90% of the water quality problems in the State. South Dakota
estimated that 70% of the water quality problems were similarly
2

-------
caused by non-point sources. Other states also emphasized the
significance of MPS with sediment, salinity and toxic substances
from mine drainage causing most of the problems.
8.	Three states indicated how non-point source controls could be
implemented - generally pinpointing existing small watershed
and Resource, Conservation end Development agricultural projects.
In many cases, no programs were identified, especially for
naturally occurring or geologic sources.
9.	The costs of implementing non-point source controls were not avail-
able to the States.
10.	North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming provided comments
related to the practicality of meeting 1983 goals. North Dakota
and South Dakota stated that goals would be met provided a group
of assumptions were met. The assumptions related to the funding
of needed planning, program and construction activities. Utah
and Wyoming identified the existing water rights system as a
constraint to the 1985 no-discharge of pollutant goal.
11.	Assuming the implementation of statewide non-point source programs,
a conservative water quality index approach indicated eight major
river segments will not meet, all or in part, 1983 goals; four
because of low flow conditions. One lake of the eight reviewed
is unlikely to meet 1983 goals. Water quality trend data were
insufficient to rate one-third of the fifty-two segments reviewed,
nearly all major lakes and all groundwater*.
11. With the lack of appropriate cost data;, very little was accom-
plished in relating benefits to costs.. Colorado, however, quanti-
fied in a general way benefit/cost relationships for some basins
and Montana offered general informatssrai. The cost presentation
in Montana's submittal indicated the uiinireasonableness of meeting
secondary treatment requirements for crliilorination.
3

-------
Table I
Summary of
State 1975 305(b) Report's
Policy Questions: Did State ....
CO
MT
ND
SD
UT | VY
1. Describe the quality of its waters today?
Yes
W D
Yes
W/o D
Yes
W D
Yes
W D
Yes
W/o D
Yes
W D
2. Identify impact of its programs over last 5 yrs.?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
3. Identify the uses made of the surface waters today?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
4. Indicate what uses will State waters support when PL 92-500 provisions are
fully i~.pler.cnted?
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
5. Identify in what places will future use9 differ from goals of fishable
and svirmable waters?
No
No
No
No
No
Ye9
6. Determine costs of achieving future uses?
Yea
Muni
Yes
Muni
Yes
Muni
Yea
Muni
No
No
7. Identify where and to what extent will non-point sources prevent State's
waters from meeting future uses?
•
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
No
8. Indicate how non-point sources can be controlled?
Yes
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
9. Estimate the cost of implementing non-point source controls?
No
No
No
No
No
No
.0. Corment 'on reasonableness of meeting FVPCAA goals?
No
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
.1. Quantify benefit/cost relationships?
Yos
Yes
No
No
No
No

-------
Chapter I
Current Water Quality Summary
and Trends
Because EPA is requested to provide an analysis of State reports
and because State reports varied widely in the use of water quality
data, the EPA office analyzed water quality using a mainstem or hydro-
logic summary approach for key rivers, after careful consideration of
Interstate and international significance. Each river was divided into
existing use-designation segments. While tributaries of the key rivers
were not assessed, large important lakes were evaluated.
The purpose of Region VIII1s water quality analysis is to complement
and supplement the State analyses and, at the same time, lend a common
basis for future work. Observations and conclusions based on the EPA
analysis are compatible with those found in State reports.
Trends were analyzed using an Index tailored to the kinds and
characteristics of data available in STORET for Region VIII. Basis for
the Index was violation of state standards. Four groups were considered
for the Index:
1.	DO & BOD
2.	Total and Fecal Coliform
3.	Nitrogen - Phosphorous
4.	Salinity and Aesthetics Related
Note: Inclusion of a "hazardous" group was deferred due to
the lack of comprehensive data.
Each group was given equal weighting and mathematically arranged to provide
a value from 1 to 100. By employing a "product of the groups" approach,
the Index was made conservative and all four groups would collectively
need to be bad for a high or bad rating to result. An Index rating of
10 roughly compares to a violation of state standards 10 percent of the
time in each group.
The Regional Office used this Index to look at macro rather than
micro trends for a 5-year period from July 1969 thru June 1974. To
provide the 5-year trend while avoiding an uneven distribution of
seasonal coverage, the data period was split with a one year overlap
to cover July 1969 thru June 1972 and July 1971 thru June 1974. Station
selection was restricted to STORET "data-rich" stations; data-rich as
of April 1974.
5

-------
Using the data-rich approach very few lakes v/ere indexable and the
few data-rich groundwater stations that were found were considered
inadequate for any aquifer-type trend analysis. Essentially, then, except,
for limited lake coverage this review is an evaluation of key, flowing,
mainstem watercourses.
In addition to the Index a "severe event" approach was used to rein-
force the Index and at the same time to handle any irregular coverage
and/or infrequent violations of much of this data. Fish kills, presence
of significant levels of pesticides in water, toxic levels for appropriate
indicator fish, U. S. Public Health Drinking Water Standard violations,
salinity greater than 1000 mg/1, pH outside a range of 6 to 9, and tem-
perature violations of state standards were analyzed outside the Index
and these excesses considered as "severe events." Incidence of these
events is summarized in Chapter 2. Unfortunately the absence of a
severe event does not imply that a problem is absent because a severe
event(s) may have occurred between sample collection periods.
Table 2 presents a segment-by-segment identification and analysis
of the stream segments and lakes, the need for water use designation
changes, and the prognostication of whether water quality will meet 1983
goals. See figures 1 through 7 for a graphic presentation on a regional,
state-by-state and station-by-station basis.
Of the fifty-two (52) stream segments and eight (8) lakes
analyzed with available STORET data, a tally of Region VIII
projections based on a Water Quality Index approach is as follows:
. Unqualified meeting of 1983 goals (sufficient data is_
available and conditions are not expected to materially
change.)
12 segments
4 lakes
. Probable meeting of 1983 goals (judgement is reserved due
to limited breadth of quantitative data and/or some doubt
regarding future conditions.)
17 segments
3	lakes
. Doubtful meeting of 1983 goals (sufficient data is avail -
able but the nature of conditions are not amenable to
rapid improvement, at least, along some portion of the
watercourse.)
4	segments
1 lake
6

-------
. Will not_meet 1983 goals without year-round flow augmentation.
4 segments
. Questionable (data is_ insufficient in quantity and breadth
and/or future conditions are not determinable.)
15 segments
Trend analysis indicates eleven (11) segments have shown
improvement. Eighteen (18) segments and two (2) lakes have main-
tained the "status quo." Twenty (20) segments, all major lakes;
except Carter and Horsetooth Reservoirs, and all groundwater were
not "rateable" due to the lack of data. Three (3) segments showed
some decline in water quality.
Other analysis indicated that pesticide data is lacking.
Available data does indicate "Blue Book" (EPA's "Water Quality
Criteria - 1972) excesses and frequent 2,4-D concentrations greater
than 0.1 ug/1 at numerous locations. DDT and Dieldrin, both under
severe use limits were also observed, mostliy prior to 1973. Numerous
incidences of pesticide traces in mud sair,piles were detected, but at
the same time found to be absent in water samples.
Fish kills have seemingly diminished iim number but their severity
is not readily determinable since centralized reporting has not been
rigorous since 1972.
A review of stream quality pertaining to Public Health Drinking
Water Standards (PHS) for dissolved heavy metals not readily treated
by conventional processes indicated severa'il, short-term, lead excesses
along the Jordan River. Marginal selenium excesses were noted on the
lower segment of the Clark Fork River early in the trend period.
Mercury, a proposed standard at 2.0 ug/1 was detected on single occassions
at and near the maximum recommended level at Pembina and Fargo respectively
on the Red River of the North. Further comeern regarding mercury is
manifested by frequent total mercury excesses along the full length of
the Red River of the North. Scattered marginal cadmium excesses were
observed at numerous main stem stations throughout the Region. Problems
and potential problems must be considered iira light of the limited
data and infrequent excesses. Problems camot unequivocally be stated
as present or absent pending generation of additional data.
Potentially toxic conditions for aquatiic life were frequently
observed at numerous locations due to heavy metals, especially zinc
and mercury, and to a lesser extent due to copper and lead. Scattered
excess concentrations were observed for other parameters such as
unionized ammonia, but uneven distribution of data collection obscured
any trends.
7

-------
Generally, with both nitrogen and phosphorous above maximum
values suggested by EPA a high eutrophic potential is found along
most major watercourses in Region VIII. Salinity, although not
directly tied to 1983 goals, but clearly to full usefulness, was
often noted at "severe" concentrations. Short term trends suggest
a gradual worsening of salinity along some segments.
Few temperature or pH problems were routinely observed; however,
intensive interest should be given to those areas with temperature
problems, especially those below several major dams and others along
low-flow watercourses. Eutrophic or acid mined-caused pH problems
should also be closely monitored.
As indicated by the Region 8 Water Quality Inventory violations
of oxygen related and bacterial indicators seem to be on the wane in
the 5 year trend period. Both the South Platte and Jordan Rivers
will nonetheless require special efforts for continued improvement
since much of their normal flow is attributable to urban return and
sewage treatment plant waste waters.
Water quality index analysis of important interregional-
interstate watercourses, namely; the Missouri, Bighorn, Green and
James Rivers indicates some gradual decline in quality as they cross
the Region. Although still in the excellent category, the Missouri,
Bighorn and Green Rivers show some decline. The James River continues
degraded for almost it entire length across the Region due primarily
to non-point sources and low flows.
Assessment of available trend data on important international
watercourse manifests low-flow related problems on the Souris River.
Despite significant waste treatment related improvements, continued
concern is warranted on the Red River of the North (RRN) because
of the presence of undersireable heavy metals. Recent upsets due
to oxygen depletion caused by point sources, also cloud water quality
improvements on the RRN. Much diminished quality on the Colorado
River is seen as it crosses the Region.
Continued diligence in data collection and program development
for control of non-point sources will be required for continuing
trend analysis and assessment of Region VIII's progress in meeting
1983 goals. A regional overview of present quality is presented in
Figure 1.
8

-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
Table 2
Water Quality Summary
State
Watercourse
Present Qua!ity*and Uses

Changes In
Past Five Years
Projected Changes In
State CIassification/
Will 1983 Goals Be Met?
Colorado
S. PIatte R.
Fai rplay to
Exposition
Ave.
B-l
1 3 to 5
UM
CF
No Change/
Yes
From Exposition
Ave. to State
Line (Nebr.)
47
B-2
43 to 47
UM
WF
State of Colorado is considering
downgrading much of this segment/
doubtful in upper reach
Colorado R.
Headwaters to
Grand Valley
B-l
8 to 3
UM
CF
No Change/
Yes
From Grand
Valley to
State Line
(Utah)
11
B-2
24 to 11
UM
WF
No Change/
Probabl e
Arkansas R.
Headwaters
to Canon City
B-l
6 to 2
UM
CF
Mo Change/
Yes
From Canon City
to State Line
(Kansas)
13
B-2
20 to 13
UM
WF
State of Colorado is considering
downgrading WF Classification in
this segment, from Pueblo to State
Line/doubtful Middle & Lower Reach
Rio Grande R.
Headwaters to
State Line
(New Mexico)
B-l
8 to 5
UM
CF
Change from B-l to B-2 being con-
sidered for lower reaches in this
segment/Yes, if changed Tin lower
reach.
Green R.
B-l
NR to 4
UM
CF
No Change/
Probabl e
* Based on 1971 - 1974 data
*'lr Uses correspond to State use designations
Explanatory notes on last page

-------
Table 2
State
Watercourse
Present Quality*and Uses
Changes In
Past Five Years
State Classification/
Will 1983 Goals Be Met?
Colorado
North Platte R.
5
B-l
UM
CF
8 to 5
No Change/
Probable

Carter Res.
3
A-l
UM '
CF
2 to 3
Mo Change/
Yes

Horsetooth Res.
3
A-l
WM '
CF
2 to 3
Mo Change/
Yes
Montana
Missouri River
Headwaters
to Sun R.
6
B,D1
UM
CF (Incl.
Salmonid)
NR to 6
No Change/
Probable

From Sun R. to
Rainbow Dam
I'lD
B,D2
UM
CF (Incl.
Salmonid -
Margi nal)
ND to ND
No Change/
Questionable

From Rainbow
Dam to Ft. Peck
Dam
2
B, D3
UM
CF (Non-
Salmonid)
3 to 2
No Change/
Probable

From Ft. Peck
Dam to Milk R.
NR
B, D2
UM
CF (Incl.
Salmonid -
Marni nal)
NR to NR
No Change/
Probable

From Milk R.
to State Line
(N. Dakota)
2
B j D3
WM
CF (Non-
Sal monid)
4 to 2
No Change/
Probable

-------
Table 2
Projected Changes In
State
Watercourse
Present Quality*and Uses
Changes In
Past Five Years
State Classification/
Will 1983 Goals Be Met?
Montana
Bighorn R. WY.
to Hilliams
Coulee
NR B,D1
UM
CF (Incl.
Salmonid)
4 to NR
No Change/
Probable
Williams Coulee
to Yellowstone
6 B j D2
UM
CF (Incl.
Salmonid -
Marginal)
11 to 6
No Change/
Probable

Yellowstone R.
Yellowstone Park
to Laurel WTP.
2 Bj D1
UM
CF (Incl.
Salmonid)
3 to 2
No Change/
Yes
From Laurel WTP
to Billings WTP
3 B. D2
UM
CF (Incl.
Salmonid -
Marginal)
5 to 3
No Change/
Yes
From Billings
WTP to State
Line (N. Dakota)
8 B, D3
UM
CF (Non-
Salmonid)
8 to 8
No Change/
Questionable

Clark Fork R.
Warm Spgs. to
Cottonwood Cr.
13 C,D2
GA
LM(Not drinking)
CF(Incl.
Salmonid -
Marginal)
9 to 13
No Change/
Questionable
From Cottonwood
Cr. to Little
Blackfoot R.
NR C,D1
GA
LM(Not drinking)
CF(Incl.
Salmonid)
16 to NR
Mo Change/
Questionable

-------
Table
2
Projected Changes In
State
Watercourse
Present Quality*and Uses
Changes In
Past Five Years
State Classification/
Will 1983 Goals Be Met?
Montana
From Little Black
Foot R. to State
Line (Idaho)
2 B,D1
UM
CF(Incl.
Salmonid)
4 to 2
No Change/
Yes

Powder R.
9 B, D3
UM
CF(Non-
Salmonid)
18 to 9
No Change/
Probabl e

Lake Koocanusa
3 A (open), D1
UM
CF
ND to 3
Mo Change/
Yes

Flathead Lake
NR B.D1
UM
CF
2 to NR
No Change/
Yes
North
Dakota
Missouri R.
2 I
UM
Native Fish
3 to 2
No Change/
Yes

Scuris R.
19 IA
LM (UM with
softening)
Native Fish
18 to 19
No Change/
No

Red River
12 I
UM
Native Fish
18 to 12
No Change/
Questionable

James River
23 IA
LM (UM with
softening)
Native Fish
18 to 23
No Change/
No

-------
Table 2
Projected Changes In
State
Watercourse
Present Quality*and Uses
Changes In
Past Five Years
State Classification/
Will 1983 Goals Be Met?
South
Dakota
Missouri R.
S.D. to Big
Bend Dam
5
1 ,2,7,8
9,10,11
UM
CF (Permanent)
NR to 5
No Change/
Yes

From Big Bend
Dam to State
Line (Iowa)
4
. 1,4,7,8,
9,10,11
UM
WF (Permanent)
4 to 4
Ho Change/
Yes

Cheyenne R. WY
to Angostura
Dam
14
5,8,9,10,
11
LM
WF (Semi-
permanent)
18 to 14
Mo Change/
No

From Angostura
Dam to Fal 1 R.
NR
4,7,8,9,
10,11
LM(Not drinking)
WF (Permanent)
NR to NR
Mo Change/
Probable

From Fall R. to
Missouri R.
7
5,7,8,
9,10,11
LM(Not drinking)
WF (Semi-
permanent)
9 10 7
No Change/
Questionable

Big Sioux R.
Headwaters to
Sioux Falls
13
1,5,8,
9,10,11
LM(Limited con-
tent)
WF (Semi -
permanent)
NR to 13
Segment near Watertown could be
changed to marginal or non-fishing/
Probable

From Sioux Falls
to Klondike Dam
22
5,8,9,10,11
LM
WF (Semi-
permanent)
NR to 22
i
No Change/
Probable

-------



Table
2

State
Watercourse
Present Quality*and Uses
Changes In
Past Five Years
Projected Changes In
State Classification/
Will 1983 Goals Be Met?
South
Dakota
From Klondike
Dam to State
Line (Nebr.)
33
5,7,8,
9,10,11
LM (Not drinking'
NF (Semi-
permanent)
NR to 33
No Change/
Probabl e

James R. N.D.
to Diversion
Dam
12
5,8,9,10,11
LM
WF (Sem;ii-
pennanent)
11 to 12
No Change/
Questi onabl e

From Diversion
Dam to Huron
ND
1,5,8;
9,10,11
LM (Limited
contact)
WF (Semi-
permanent)
ND to ND
No Change/
Questionable

From Huron to
Missouri R.
21
5,8,9,10,11
LM
WF (Semi-
permanent)
14 to 21
No Change/
Questi onable

Big Stone Lake
6
4,7,8,9,10
UM
WF (Permanent)
NR to 6
No Change/
Probable

Lake Frances
Case
ND
1,2,7,
8,9,11
UM
CF (Permanent)
NR to ND
No Change/
Probable

Oahe Res.
NR
1,4,7,
8,9,11
UM
WF (Permanent)
NR to NR
No Change/
Probabl e

-------
Table 2
Projected Changes-In
State
Watercourse
Present Quality*and Uses
Changes In
Past Five Years
State Classification/
Will 1983 Goals Be Met?
Utah
Jordan R. Utah
lane to Utah
County Line
12 CW
LM (For drinking'
WF
NR to 12
No Change/
Probable but depends on Utah
Lake in upper reach
From County
Line to Great
Salt Lake
54 CC
LM (For drinking'
CF
63 to 54
No Change/
Doubtful

Colorado R.
15 CW
LM (For drinking)
WF
32 to 15
No Change/
Questionable

Bear R. Head-
waters to WY
ND CC
LM (For drinking)
CF
ND to ND
No Change/
Questionable
UT to WY
ND CC
LM (For drinking)
CF
ND to ND
No Change/
Questionable
Idaho to GSL
18 CW
LM (For drinking)
WF
32 to 18
No Change/
Probable

Weber R. Head-
waters to high-
way 40
10 CC
LM (For drinking)
CF
21 to 10
No Change/
Probable - Question-
able in lower reach
Highway 40 to
GSL
MR CW
LM (For drinking)
WF
NR to NR
No Change/
No

Green R. from
Flaming Forge
to Colorado
7 CC
LM (For drinking'
CF
NR to 7
No Change/
Yes
State of
Colorado to
Colorado R.
11 CW
LM (For drinking)
WF
9 to 11
No Change/
Provable

-------
Table ^
Projected Changes In
State
Watercourse
Present Quality*and Uses
Changes In
Past Five Years
State Classification/
Will 1983 Goals Be Met?
Utah
Utah Lake
ND
C
LM (For drinking)
Fish Propagation
X perpetuation
NR to ND
No Change/
Doubtful
Wyoming
N. Platte R.
10
I
CF
WF (Natural
Game Fish)
12 to 10
No Change/
Questionable
below Casper

Wind-Bi ghorn
3
I
CF
WF (Natural
Game Fish)
NR to 3
No Change/
Questi onable

Green R.
1
I
CF
WF (Natural
Game Fish)
NR to 1
No Change/
Yes

Powder R.
10
I
CF
WF (Natural
Game Fish)
NR to 10
No Change/
Questi onable
Mote: Ratings are not directly comparable except for the same classification in the same State; however,
for general use 0-5 excellent; 5-15 good to fair; 15 - 100 poor to worst.
UM - Unlimited Man — Full body contact recreation and for drinking
LM - Limited Man -- Either limited or no contact recreation and/or not for drinking
CF - Co»ld Fish -- Including fish propagation, except as noted
WF - Warm Fish — Including fish propagation, except as noted
NR. - Mot Rateable
ND - No Data

-------
Chapter II
Control Programs and Water
Quality Goals
The following addresses the key rivers and lakes of Region VIII
using the Region VIII Water Quality Index (Index). Index data was
supplemented by each states 305(b) reports and other pertinent data.
The State of Colorado also developed an index, but it rated basinwide
water quality and accounted for the quality of mainstems and tributaries.
COLORADO
South Platte River
The upper segment of the South Platte is dominated by three major
impoundments with flow augmented by intermittent transmountain diversions
from the Colorado River Basin. There is large scale use of irrigation
and seasonally related return flows. Below South Platte, Colorado, the
river is dominated by diversion to the Denver Water Board's storage
reservoirs and construction of Chatfield Dam. One major industrial
discharge on a tributary and two mainstem (major) sewage treatment plants
also affect water quality. Significant improvements have been noted due
to reduced dissolved oxygen violations above Littleton and reduced
dissolved oxygen and bacterological violations at Dartmouth Avenue
(Englewood, Colorado). Numerous temperature excesses were observed
above Littleton and at Dartmouth Avenue. Severe heavy metals events,
most noticably zinc, copper and mercury were observed. Index analysis
indicates quality is improving. This segment has excellent overall
quality for recreation but may be questionable for cold water fish
perpetuation and propagation, although, it should meet 1983 goals
if heavy metals violations can be resolved.
The lower segment of the South Platte (below Exposition Avenue)
is directly affected by seven major sewage treatment plants; including
a 140 million gallon per day/average discharge, numerous industrial
discharges, power plant withdrawals and consumptive use, urban runoff,
numerous feedlots, and significant irrigation diversions and return
flows. This segment is extremely nitrogen and phosphorus rich, has
numerous salinity violations; experiences some dissolved oxygen, BOD,
and fecal coliform violations, and has had severe heavy metals and
unionized ammonia events. Spill related fish kills have occurred in
1972 and 1974. 1983 goals are only achievable with continued and
extensive upgrading of point source discharges, especially in the
Denver Metropolitan Area. Sources of heavy metals are not identified
and may further preclude meeting 1983 goals. Since the lower reach
is, at times, nearly all sewage treatment plant return water it is
doubtful that this reach will, at all times, meet 1983 goals.
17

-------
Colorado River
The segment of the Colorado River above Grand Valley is affected
by numerous storage reservoirs on tributaries, significant trans-
mountain diversions, mine drainage, mineralized springs, a major zinc
refining industry on a tributary, and seasonal tourism. General water
quality is excellent and this segment should meet 1983 goals although
high pH at Hot Sulphur Springs and zinc excesses at Dotsero are known
problems.
From Grand Valley to the Utah border the Colorado River is
dominated by irrigation diversions, storage reservoirs on tributaries,
one major power plant, an oil refinery and one major sewage treat-
ment plant. This segment should meet 1983 goals if scattered bacter-
iological violations are reduced and if eutrophic conditions do not
make the lower segment unsuitable for a balanced warm water fishery.
Zinc and unionized ammonia events also warrant continued observation.
Arkansas River
Quality of the Arkansas River above Canon City is primarily
affected by irrigation diversions and returns, and past & present
mining activities. General quality is good to excellent and unlimited
use for recreation is probable, however fish perpetuation and propaga-
tion is clouded due to numerous and high zinc violations.
Below Canon City quality is impacted by 10 major sewage treatment
plants, (mostly far upstream on tributaries), significant irrigation use
and return flow, several industrial withdrawals and discharges, and
construction of the Pueblo Dam. Identified problems include abundant
nutrients, severe salinity, fecal and total coliform, and zinc and
mercury. The segment from Canon City to Pueblo will almost certainly
meet warm or cold water uses, however, low flow and poor channel charac-
teristics below Pueblo will probably preclude achievement of a
viable warm water fishery or uses for primary contact recreation.
Rio Grande
The upper reach is dominated by numerous storage reservoirs, trans-
mountain diversions, and mining activities. The lower segment is primarily
impacted by irrigation diversions and returns, where temperature excesses
dissolved oxygen violations, and numerous severe zinc events have been
noted. Temperature excesses in the lower reach make quality marginal for
perpetuation and propagation of a cold water fishery. Two fish kills
were noted in the upper segment. Low flows and poor channel characteristics
contribute to problems. If the lower reach is reclassified and or if
flow is augmented the fish and man-related goals of 1983 should be met.
18

-------
Green River
Rated as generally excellent this short reach is affected by
irrigation use and return flows and overall impact of the Flaming
Gorge Reservoir. Due to potential energy development close scrutiny
of this reach is warranted but it is probable that 1983 goals
will be met.
North Platte
Water quality is affected by irrigation use and subsequent return
flows, as well as transmountain diversions, storage reservoirs, cattle
grazing and a fluorspar mining activity. Overall quality is excellent
and should meet unqualified use for 1983 goals, assuming occasional
dissolved oxygen violations do not limit fishing uses.
Colorado Lakes
Both the Horsetooth and Carter Reservoirs has sufficient data for
analysis and showed excellent overall quality. Carter Reservoir is
supplied primarily by Colorado River Headwaters and is of high quality
with occassionally low but not critical D.O. problems. Horsetooth
Reservoir has had some low D.O.'s, high temperature and low pH
suggesting occassional eutrophic problems. Both reservoirs should
meet 1983 goals.
Figure 2 illustrates the water quality picture for Colorado on a
station-by-station, segment-by-segment basis.
19

-------
Additional Notes for Interpreting
Figure 2 through 7
First data period
July 69 - July 72
Index number fo
entire segment for
first data period
Second data period
July 71 - July 74
Index number for entire
segment for second data
period
20

-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
MONTANA
Missouri River
Water quality from the headwaters to the Sun River is impacted
by numerous reservoirs on the mainstem and tributaries. In addition
to irrigation returns and hydroelectric plants, abandoned mines
significantly affect water quality. Sedimentation and dewatering are
serious problems on some headwaters streams. Overall quality is rated
as good to excellent and it appears this segment will meet the 1983
goals, although copper, lead and zinc problems at Toston and the
general lack of data make this conclusion tentative.
The quality of the Missouri River from the Sun River to Rainbow
Dam is impacted by one major sewage treatment and one large copper
refinery plant at Great Falls. Sediment contribution from the Sun
River is significant. Analysis is limited due to the absence of
trend data, although dissolved oxygen and coliform problems were cited
by the State of Montana. In the absence of data it must remain
questionable whether 1983 goals will be met on this segment.
Quality from the Rainbow Dam to the North Dakota border is
primarily impacted by a variety of non-point sources, past mining
activity, and Fort Peck Reservoir. The overall quality of this
segment is seemingly excellent and it is probable that 1983 goals will
be met. Severe events for salinity and mercury cloud this presumption.
Bighorn River
Quality of the Bighorn River is affected by numerous upstream
reservoirs, especially Bighorn Lake, (recently filled). Irrigation
use and oil well discharges significantly impact water quality.
Salinity is a major problem. The State of Montana indicates sediment
as a problem. Marginal temperature violations and occasional coliform
violations have been noted. Data is lacking to determine trends or to
positively assess whether the upper segment will meet 1983 goals, how-
ever it is probable that it will. The lower segment will probably meet
1983 goals too but salinity violations will limit full use.
Yellowstone River
From the headwaters to Laurel the quality of water is primarily
impacted by irrigation and reservoir diversions on the mainstream
and tributaries. Overall quality is excellent and it is expected
this segment will meet 1983 goals. This conclusion is obscured by
"naturally" occurring arsenic violations noted near the confluence of
the Gardner River.
21

-------
The short segment from Laurel to Billings is affected primarily by
some irrigation diversions, a major oil refinery and one major sewage
treatment plant. Overall quality is excellent- and 1983 goals should be
met although coliform violations and the presence of oil and grease
could interfere.
In addition to the upstream effects noted above, the Yellowstone
River from Billings to the North Dakota border is impacted by two
major oil refinery discharges, two seasonal sugar refineries, one power
plant, one major sewage treatment plant and non-point sources. Frequent
turbidity, coliform and salinity violations have been noted on the
segment. Severe copper, lead and zinc events were also noted. Marginal
quality is indicated by Index analysis and combined with heavy metal
events it is questionable this segment will meet 1983 goals.
Clark Fork River
Above Cottonwood Creek the river is affected by past and present
mining activities. Two major copper mines and a copper refinery as well
as a major sewage treatment plant, are located on nearby tributaries.
Irrigation diversions are a factor. Salinity is often found in excessive
concentrations. Severe zinc, copper and aluminum events, as well as,
marginal mercury and cadmium events, were noted. This reach is of
generally marginal quality and numerous heavy metal events make it ques-
tionable that 1983 goals will be met.
Between Cottonwood Creek and the Little Blackfoot River water quality
is mostly a function of upstream area and past and present mining
activities. Although lacking in data for the 1971 thru 1974 period,
earlier heavy metal events for copper, zinc, aluminum and some manganese
violations were observed. Generally found1 to have a high eutrophic
potential, this reach has noted low D.O.'s during non-ice cover
conditions. Salinity and coliform violations were frequent. It is
questionable that this reach will meet 1983 goals.
Below the Little Blackfoot the Clark: Fork River is impacted by Flat-
head, Noxon and Hungry Horse Lakes as well as one major STP and one
paperpulp mill discharge near Missoula. Heavy metals, such as zinc,
copper and aluminum were generally found fin excessive quantities.
Scattered violations of coliform standards were observed above
Missoula. Data is generally lacking below Missoula to Thompson
Falls. The lower reach of this segment has noted selenium and tempera-
ture violations even below the confluence with the Flathead River.
Supersaturated gases were observed at botfti Noxon Rapids and Cabinet
George Dams. With continued pollution aiuattement emphasis this
segment will meet 1983 goals.
22

-------
Powder River
Quality from the Wyoming border to Yellowstone River is affected
by diversions for irrigation, storage reservoirs and non-point sources.
Coliform data is lacking. Severe salinity and heavy metal problems
have been observed. Marginal quality is indicated by Index analyses.
In the absence of adequate coliform data, or significant sources of
•bacterial contanmination it is assumed that this segment will
probably meet 1983 goals although full usefulness will be seriously
impaired by high salinity and potential dewatering activities.
Flathead and Koocanusa Lakes
Both lakes have excellent water quality and should meet 1983
goals although two selenium violations, and one violation each for
lead and mercury, as well as marginal temperature excesses at Flat-
head Lake warrant continued concern. Algal blooms have occurred
in the Canadian and the upper U.S. sections of Koocanusa Lake.
Additional data on Public Health Service Drinking Water and other
toxic parameters are needed for Koocanusa Lake.
Figure 3 illustrates the water quality picture for Montana
on a station-by-station, segment-by-segment basis.
23

-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
NORTH DAKOTA
Missouri River
Water quality is dominated by Lake Sakakawea. Mainstem
dischargers include three power plants and two major sewage treat-
ment plants. An oil refinery and an additional power plant are located
on nearby tributaries. Isolated salinity violations were noted at
Williston and below Garrision Dam. Severe events for mercury were noted
at Newtown and at the Garrison Dam. Occasional lead and zinc events
have also been noted along- the segment. General water quality is
excellent and 1983 goals should be met, although the impact of heavy
metals should be studied further.
Souris River
Quality is dominated by Lake Darling on the mainstem and smaller
reservoirs on the tributaries. There is some diversion for irrigation
and municipal use. One major sewage treatment plant is located on the
mainstem and one is found on a tributary. Numerous dissolved oxygen
violations have been observed at Mi not and below. Salinity and pH are
persistent violations along the entire length of the River in North
Dakota. Color, manganese, and pH violations were also noted.
Scattered copper, zinc and aluminum events were observed. Near no-flow
conditions are frequent. A fish kill was observed at Mi not in 1973.
This reach is not expected to meet 1983 goals in the absence of flow
augmentation and/or elimination of numerous severe events related to
non-point sources.
Red River of the North
This river serves as the boundary between Minnesota and North
Dakota. Water quality is affected by reservoirs, one at the head-
waters and others on the tributaries. Extensive diversions are made
for irrigation and water supplies. Two power plants, five sugar
refineries and three sewage treatment plants are located on the main-
stem and near tributaries in the two states. Improvements in dis-
solved oxygen and related areas have significantly improved quality
as indicated by Index analysis. However, zinc, mercury, lead, copper
and cadmium events were noted. Many pH, and scattered aluminum,
salinity, Poly Chlorinated Biphenyls, unionized ammonia and cyanide
events were observed. Two fish kills were identified below Fargo.
Due to continued severe events for numerous heavy metals; including
PHS standards, and assorted other parameters, it is questionable if
this watercourse will meet 1983 goals. Some form of flow augmentation
would be needed to supplement low flow periods.
24

-------
James River
Water quality is impacted by three large reservoirs and diversions
for agricultural and municipal uses. One major sewage treatment plant
is located on the mainstem. Numerous total and, to a lesser extent,
fecal coliform violations were noted below Jamestown. Turbidity is
a frequent violation at La Moure and Oafces. Frequent salinity
excesses, intensifying at and below Jamestown, were monitored. Scattered
mercuty, pH, copper, unionized ammonia and aluminum events were observed.
Near no-flow conditions are frequent at Jamestown. A decline in water
quality due primarily to bacteriological violations is indicated by the
Index. Coupled with numerous severe events related to non-point sources
and low flow, this segment is not expected to meet 1983 goals. Flow
augmentation for low flow periods is needed.
Figure 4 illustrates the water quality picture for North Dakota
on a station-by-station, segment-by-seement basis.
25

-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
SOUTH DAKOTA
Missouri River
Water quality is dominated by Oahe Lake, Lake Sharp, Lake
Francis Case, and Lewis and Clark Lake. Three significant sewage
treatment plants are located on the mainstem and tributaries. One
major mining and metal recovery related discharge is located on a
tributary of the Cheyenne River. Numerous salinity and some marginal
temperature excesses have been observed below Oahe Dam and at Pierre.
Several mercury violations were also observed below Oahe Dam and at
Big Bend Dam. Some decline in quality attributable to salinity and
phosphorus violations is indicated in the reach above Big Bend Dam.
This reach is expected to reach 1983 goals; however, mercury
violations are noteworthy, and importantly, the Cheyenne arm of
Oahe Reservoir has been closed to commercial fishing because of
high mercury residue found in fish flesh.
Mercury violations below Big Bend Dam to Iowa cloud an
unqualified judgement that this segment will meet 1983 goals regarding,
year-round, unqualified use as a warm water fishery.
Cheyenne River
The upper reach of the Cheyenne River above Angostura Dam
is affected by numerous small reservoirs for stock watering and
irrigation. Frequent fecal coliform and salinity violations were
noted. Zinc, copper, selenium, unionized ammonia, dissolved oxygen,
cadmium, cyanide and mercury problems were also identified. Without
flow augmentation and removal of heavy metals this segment will
not meet 1983 goals.
Additional data is needed to determine if the segment from
Angostura Dam to Fall River will meet 1983 goals, however, general
indicators suggest that these goals are attainable. High salinity
will limit usefulness.
The Cheyenne River from Fall River to the Missouri River is
impacted by tributary discharges from a major sewage treatment plant
and several industrial dischargers, including one major mining
activity. Because of agricultural uses and returns and the geologic
weathering of native soils and rocks, intense salinity events are
noted along the segment. Numerous mercury, lead, copper and zinc
events were noted near Eagle Butte. Isolated aluminum, chromium,
nickel and cyanide events were also observed. Continued heavy
metals events make it questionable that this reach will be a
viable fishery and severe salinity concentrations may limit the
use of water for domestic and selective irrigation purposes.
26

-------
IlSL Sioux River
Water quality is primarily impacted by sediment from agricultural
runoff. Two major sewage treatment plants and several industrial
dischargers are also present. Near no-flow conditions are frequent
above Sioux Falls. Salinity and managanese were frequent violations
at Brookings. Severe salinity events and fecal coliform violations
were observed in the segment from Sioux Falls to Klondike Dam. It
is presumed that the segment to below Sioux Falls will meet 1983
goals providing mimimum stream flow, control of non-point sources
and adequate sewage treatment is provided. It is assumed that the
River below Klondike Dam will meet the 1983 goals if upstream
contitions are corrected. Salinity will probably continue to
limit the use of water for domestic and irrigation purposes.
James River
The quality of the James River from the North*Dakota border to
the Diversion Dam is affected by upstream reservoirs and point
and non-point sources as well as extensive agricultural and live-
stock feeding operations. Channel characteristics are unfavorable.
There is one major sewage treatment plant on the mainstem. Nutrients
are abundant, and there have been violations of dissolved oxygen,
salinity, manganese, total suspended solids and iron. Available
Index data indicates marginal quality and without availability toxic
data, it is questionable whether this reach will meet 1983 goals.
The reach from the Diversion Dam to Huron is impacted by additional
diversions, feedlot operations, and poor channel characteristics. Data
is limited. Quality in this reach is primarily dependent upon the
upstream reach.
Additional agricultural and feedlot operations place additional
pressure on the stream from Huron to the Missouri River. Two major
sev/age treatment plants are also present. Frequent violations include
salinity, manganese, iron, fecal coliform and dissolved oxygen. Fish
kills were reported at Huron and Mitchell. Dissolved oxygen, unionized
ammonia and mercury violations were seen at Scotland. More intense
monitoring to determine the frequency, nature and magnitude of the
mercury problem should be carried out. The Index indicates quality
is continuing to decline. Salinity and low flow conditions make it
questionable that 1983 goals will be met without extensive control
of point and non-point sources of pollution; especially, control
of municipal and feedlot discharges.
27

-------
South Dakota Lakes
Lake Oahe is a predominant feature of water quality on the
Upper Missouri where some severe mercury events were observed.
Salinity violations are frequent in Big Stone and Francis Case
Lakes. It is probable that these three lakes will meet 1983 goals,
however, more data is necessary before a firmer judgment can be offered.
Mercury violations in Lake Oahe obscure otherwise high quality
indicators.
Figure 5 illustrates the water quality picture for South Dakota
on a station-by-station, segment-by-segment basis.
28

-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
UTAH
Jordan River/Utah Lake
Low and no-flow conditions on several tributaries of Utah Lake
coupled with additional proposed diversions and present turbid
conditions make it doubtful that the entire Lake will meet 1983
goals. High salinity may limit its usefulness for other purposes
as well. BOD, salinity and turbidity are routine violations.
Copper, zinc, and cadmium violations have also been observed.
General quality is marginal.
From Utah Lake to the Utah and Salt Lake County line water
quality of the Jordan River is primarily based on the quality of
waters released from Utah Lake. Additional events for lead,
selenium, mercury and pH have been observed.
Irrigation diversions and return flows in the upper reach of
the Jordan River along with nine major sewage treatment plants along
the middle and lower reach significantly degrade water quality of the
stream as it flows toward the Great Salt Lake. Urban and storm
runoff also significantly impact water quality in the lower reaches.
Withdrawal for municipal and agricultural uses and subsequent return
flow alter quality of tributary streams. Nitrogen and phosphorus are
abundant; salinity is a routine violation; chloride is sometimes
violated; BOD is frequently in excess of the State Standard of 5 mg/1;
total coliform is frequently violated; PHS violations such as lead,
selenium, and toxic conditions due to cadmium, zinc and copper have
been reported; and oil and grease presumably from storm sewers, has
been cited by the State of Utah as a frequent event. The upper segment
of the reach could presumably meet 1983 goals unless return flows
continue to degrade quality. It is doubtful however that the upper
segment will meet 1983 goals.
Continued management of water quality in this area is a complex
regional problem requiring sophisticated water resources management,
control of non-point sources, urban storm sewers, consolidating and
upgrading municipal facilities including nutrient removal and control
of urban storm water runoff.
Colorado River
Water quality is primarily affected by irrigation diversions
and returns, storage reservoirs, and transmountain diversions in
Colorado, and natural non-point sources. Non-point sources
29

-------
affect quality primarily via major tributaries along this segment.
Coal fired power generation and oil shale development may significantly
impact water resource development and water quality in this basin.
Salinity is the major problem in this segment, although BOD, nutrient,
fecal coliform, lead, zinc copper and mercury have been identified in
significant amounts. Evaluation of data on the segment from the
Colorado-Utah border to Moab indicate that it is questionable if
1983 goals will be met unless effective non-point source controls are
implemented.
Bear River
There is limited data for the Bear River from its headwaters
to the Utah-Idaho border. In the absence of data it is questionable
if this segment will meet 1983 goals.
The quality of the Bear River from the Idaho-Utah border to
the Great Salt Lake is affected by diversion to the Bear Lake
storage reservoir, power projects, many irrigation diversions and
returns, sugar refinery, a dairy products plant and two major sewage
treatment plants. Nitrogen and phosphorus are generally available
and salinity, total coliform and fecal coliform violations have
been observed. The Index indicates that quality is improving and
this segment will probably meet 1983 goals, however, minimum flow,
and point and non-point pollution control will be necessary to do.
so.
Weber River
Quality of the Weber River from its headwaters to Highway 40
at Plain City is dominated by irrigation diversions and five storage
reservoirs. There is some transbasin diversion of water to the
Provo River. During the irrigation season no flow conditions
are common in the lowest reach of this segment. A major sewage
treatment plant and urban and storm runoff also affect quality. General
improvement is suggested by the Index, however, additional data is
required on this segment. Without flow augmentation and significant
control of non-point sources as well as upgrading of point sources
and control of urban runoff, it is possible that the lowest reach of
this segment may not meet 1983 goals. However, it is presumed that
with continued abatement this entire segment will probably attain
1983 goals.
The short segment of the Weber River from Plain City to the Bird
Refuge is subject to frequent no-flow and nutrient rich conditions.
No trend analysis is possible due to the lack of data, nonetheless in
the absence of flow-augmentation it is very unlikely that this segment
will be able to support fish life and its use for body contact recrea-
tion is questionable.
30

-------
Green River
Water quality in the upper reach is dominated by impoundment effects
and inputs to the Flaming Gorge Reservoir. Transbasin diversions and
diversions for irrigation also affect quality in this reach. Flaming
Gorge Reservoir and this upper reach of the Green River are subject
to seasonal tourism. General quality appears to be adequate to meet
1983 goals.
Figure 6 illustrates the water quality picture for Utah on a
station-by-station, segment-by-segment basis.
31

-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
WYOMING
North PIatte River
The North Platte River Basin is the most densely populated
area in the sparsely populated State. Industrial activities are
mainly concentrated near the Casper area. Water quality is affected
by five major reservoirs and irrigation diversions and return.
Groundv/ater withdrawals and power development projects also impact
quality. One major municipal sewage treatment plant, a seasonal
sugar refinery discharge and a power plant are located on the main-
stream. Two major uranium mines and one iron processing industry
are located in the basin. Salinity violations and eutrophic conditions
are noted below Casper to the Nebraska border. The Index shows
improvement and it is expected that this segment may meet 1983 goals,
however, conditions below Casper must be improved significantly.
Upgrading municipal and industrial discharges by the NPDES permit
program and Best Management Practices (BMP) for agricultural dis-
charges should solve many existing problems.
Wind - Bighorn River Basin
Water quality in this scenic recreation area is primarily affected
by irrigation diversions and returns and oil well discharges. Diversion
for the Riverton Project, significant sewage treatment plant, two seasonal
sugar refinery discharges and a major uranium mine are also located on
the mainstem or nearby tributaries. Natural runoff and irrigation return
flows result in significant water quality problems. The water of
the basin seems generally of good to excellent quality but this assess-
ment must remain questionable until additional data is generated.
Green River Basin
Water quality in this area is affected primarily by irrigation
diversions and returns and one sewage treatment plant near the back-
waters of the Flaming Gorge Reservoir. Municipalities in this area are
experiencing "boom" conditions due to energy-related development.
Numerous high pH values were recorded along this segment. Additional
data is required for a definitive assessment, but this segment is
expected to meet 1983 goals, assuming adequate controls pertaining
to population pressures are employed.
Powder River Basin
Water quality is affected by numerous irrigation diverisions
and returns, erosion of stream channels and oil well discharges;
especially along the Salt Creek drainage. D.O. and turbidity as
well as frequent fecal coliform violations and severe salinity were
noted at Arvada. Several temperature and salinity excesses were
32

-------
also measured on the South Fork at Kaycee. It is questionable
that this entire reach will meet 1983 goals without flow
augmentation, although additional data is required before any
clear assessment is possible for the entire segment. Energy
development may aggravate water quality problems further.
Solutions include non-point source control, NPDES permit
limitations, and the NEPA process.
Figure 7 illustrates the water quality picture for Wyoming on
a station-by-station, segment-by-segment basis.
33

-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
Chapter III
Costs and Benefits of
Meeting Water Quality Goals
The data for costs and benefits provided in the State reports are
very limited. In the case of Utah and Wyoming no data were reported
for any categories. Utah did report expenditures during FY 73 for
fishing and waterfowl hunting, as an indication of the importance of
such activities to the econorny of the State.
Colorado, Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota provided estimates
for municipal costs. These were reported in varying degrees by each State.
Montana and North Dakota provided estimates by cost category as shown in
the 1974 Meeds Survey.
Colorado provided estimates for municipal treatment plant capital costs,
only, in the amount of $274 million by 1977 and an additional $41.8 mi Hi en
by 1983. Colorado also noted that costs for upgrading industrial discharges
to meet 1977 policy and 1983 goals are not available but are expected to be
substantial.
South Dakota estimated total municipal facilities costs for each River
Basin which totaled about $109 million. South Dakota also provided partial
agricultural facilities inventory and an industrial facilities inventory,
but estimated costs were not available.
For the most part reliable data are not available at this time for
even a rough estimate of the costs and benefits associated with water
quality improvements. In summary, however, all States indicated that more
refined costs for municipal point sources, and cost estimates for industrial
and non-point source control will result from the "208" planning effort
and the plans of each State for non-designated areas.
In a draft report entitled "Cost Effectiveness of Agricultural
Non-point Source Water Pollution Control" which is still in review stage
by the Washington Environmental Research Center first order magnitude
costs are developed for the control of sediments, nutrients, pesticides
and salts from non-point agricultural problems by Water Resource Regions
as defined by the Water Resources Council. While boundary problems exists
between EPA regions and WRC hydrological regions, the results present a
first attempt at compiling the costs of agricultural non-point problems
which predominate in Region VIII.
34

-------
Chapter IV
Non-point Sources
The assessment of non-point sources (NPS) in Region VIII is in
a very elementary stage at the present time. The assessment and conse-
quently the prevention and control are progressing at a rather slow pace.
The initiation of twenty-two "208 areawide planning" efforts will give
more emphasis and speed to the NPS program. Long term emphasis is going
to be necessary to achieve progress. The non-point source problems and
their solutions are critical to achieving water quality goals in the
region. The problem of separating "natural" non-point sources from man-
induced sources has received little attention. This problem must be
carefully considered because of the very real possibility of ignoring
significant sources and writing them off as a natural condition.
The non-point source assessments provided by the states can be gen-
erally summarized as follows:
1.	Each state identified NPS as water quality problems.
2.	Most states identified NPS as the most probable barrier to
meeting 1983 goals.
3.	There has been no significant quantification of non-point
sources, or their impact on ambient water quality.
4.	There is no quantification of natural vs. man-accelerated
sources.
5.	State programs to prevent or control non-point source pollution
are either lacking or minimal. State resources are directed
toward point sources.
6.	Costs have not been determined or projected for controlling
non-point sources. Consequently cost/benefit analysis are
lacking.
Colorado
The points that have been outlined in the general summary apply
to the Colorado assessment of non-point sources. The most frequently
mentioned problem NPS is irrigation return flows. Urban runoff is a
significant problem in the large metropolitan areas of Denver and
Colorado Springs. Construction activities throughout the State have
not been discussed but are significant in specific locations. Good
quantification of the salinity and acid mine drainage problems have
been done in the Colorado drainage basin.
35

-------
Montana
Sediments have been identified as the major non-point pollutant
throughout the1State of Montana. Heavy metals from past mining activities
are significant problems in many areas.
The problem most often mentioned as the cause of non-point pollution
is poor land practice. This cause is general and covers a multitude of
specific problems.
Montana has identified the miles of stream that have been degraded
throughout the state. Of the approximately 3400 miles of streams mentioned,
non-point source pollution degrades approximately 3000 miles. This does
not imply standards violations in all cases but does indicate the magnitude
and extent of the problem.
North Dakota
No assessment of non-point source pollution has been provided on a
basin-by-basin basis. Several sources are identified, the majority of
which are sources associated with agricultural activities. The non-point
source summary contained in the State report states that water quality
standards for some parameters are being violated even though point sources
are nondischarging in many instances. No cost information if included.
South Dakota
In summarizing'non-point sources pollution in South Dakota the most
prevalent source is from agricultural practices. Cropping and grazing
practices seem to be the major specific activities causing problems. Again,
prevention and control practices are minimal or completely lacking in most
situations.
Estimates have been made that identify 70% of the water quality
problems in South Dakota are a result of non-point pollution. Little
other quantification exists and cost information is not presented.
Utah
Non-point pollution sources in Utah are varied. Agricultural
practices, specifically grazing and irrigation return flows, are the
largest sources. Urban non-point sources (storm water) account for
significant problems along the "Wasatch Front" area. These sources
have not been quantified. Again no cost information is presented.
36

-------
Wyoming
Irrigation return flows have been identified as significant non-
point sources throughout Wyoming. Overgrazed ranges is another signifi-
cant source of pollution found state-wide. These tv/o practices account
for the majority of non-point source pollution in Wyoming. As with
other states little has been done to quantify the problem throughout the
state. Cost of control programs and expected benefits are not available.
37

-------