Water Quality Inventory EXECUTIVE SUMMAR U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION VIII — DENVER, COLO. ------- R3 0012-ci 6, ^ ANALYSIS OF 1975 STATE 305(b) REPORTS U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION VIII Denver, Colorado October 1975 ------- TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE Introduction and Summary ---------------- 1 SUMMARY 2 Table 1 - 4 I. Current Water Quality Summary and Trends -------- 5 Figure 1 (Regional) ------------------ 9 Table 2 (Colorado - Wyoming) -------------- 10 II. Control Programs and Water Quality Goals -------- 18 COLORADO - • 18 Figure 2 (Colorado) ------------------ 22 MONTANA 23 Figure 3 (Montana) ------------------- 26 NORTH DAKOTA 27 Figure 4 (North Dakota) ---------------- 29 SOUTH DAKOTA 30 Figure 5 (South Dakota) ---------------- 33 UTAH - 34 Figure 6 (Utah) -------------------- 37 WYOMING 38 Figure 7 (Wyoming) ------------------- 40 III. Costs and Benefits of Meeting Water Quality Goals - - - 41 IV. Non-Point Sources ------------------- 42 ------- 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 1n 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. 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 flshable 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 NPS 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 and 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 1n 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. 12. 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 information. The cost presentation in Montana's submittal indicated the unreasonableness of meeting secondary treatment requirements for chlorination. 3 ------- Table I Summary of State 1975 305(b) Reports Policy Questions: Did State ... CO MT ND SD UT 1. Describe the quality of its waters today? Yes W D Yes Vfo D Yes W D Yes W D Yes W/o D 2. Identify impact of its programs over last 5 yrs.? Yes 3. Identify the uses made of the surface waters today? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes A. Indicate what uses will State waters support when PL 92-500 provisions are fully implemented? Mo Ho Mo No No 5. Identify in what places will future uses differ from goals of fishable and svimmable waters? No No No 6. Determine costs of achieving future uses? Yes Muni YC9 Muni Ye9 Muni Yes Muni 7. Identify where and to what extent will non-point sources prevent State's waters from neeting future uses? Yes Yes No Yes 8. Indicate how non-point sources can be controlled? Yes No No Yes 9. Estimate the cost of implementing non-point source controls? No No No No No Yes Yes No 10. Coiraent 'on reasonableness of meeting FWPCAA goals? No NO Yes Yes Yes 11. Quantify benefit/cost relationships? W D = With supporting data W/o D = Without supporting data Yes Yes 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 VIII's 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 were 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 1s 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 1s summarized 1n Chapter 2. Unfortunately the absence of a severe event does not imply that a problem 1s 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 are 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 are 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 are Insufficient 1n 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 analyses indicated that pesticide data are lackino. Available data do 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, mostly prior to 1973. Numerous incidences of pesticide traces in mud samples were detected, but at the same time found to be absent in water samples. Fish kills have seemingly diminished 1n 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 several, short-term, lead excesses along the Jordan River. Marginal selenium excesses were noted on the lower segment of the Clark Fork River early 1n the trend period. Mercury, a proposed standard at 2.0 ug/1 was detected on single occasslons at and near the maximum recommended level at Pembina and Fargo respectively on the Red River of the North. Further concern regarding mercury 1s 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 1n light of the limited data and Infrequent excesses. Problems cannot unequivocally be stated as present or absent pending generation of additional data. Potentially toxic conditions for aquatic 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 1n 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 1n 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 1s 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 1t 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 Sourls River. Despite significant waste treatment related improvements, continued concern 1s warranted on the Red River of the North (RRN) because of the presence of underslreable 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 1s seen as 1t 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 VIII1s progress 1n meeting 1983 goals. A regional overview of present quality is presented 1n Figure 1. 8 ------- PAGE NOT AVAILABLE DIGITALLY ------- State Watercourse TABLE 2 WATER QUALITY SUMMARY Changes In Present Quality*and Uses *1 Past Five Years Projected Changes In State Classification/ Will 1983 Goals Be Met? Colorado S. PI atte 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/ noubtful 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/ Probable Arkansas R. Headwaters to Canon City B-l UM CF 6 to 2 No 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/ Probable * Based on 1971 - 1974 data ** Usos correspond to State use designations Explanatory notes on last page ------- State Watercourse TABLE 2 WAT Present Quality*and Uses ER QUALITY SUMMARY Changes In Past Five Years Projected Changes In 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 No Change/ Yes Horsetooth Res. 3 A-l WM CF 2 to 3 No 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 ND B,D2 UM CF (Incl. Salmonid - Marginal) 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 Mi 1k R. NR B,D2 UM CF (Incl. Salmonid - Maroi nal) :jr to .NR fJo Change/ Probable From Milk R. to State Line (N. Dakota) 2 B,D3 WM CF (Non- Salmonid) 4 to 2 Mo Change/ Probable ------- TABLE 2 WATER QUALITY SUMMARY 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 Wi11i ams Coulee NR B j 01 UM CF (Incl. Salmoni d) 4 to NR No Change/ Probable Williams Coulee to Yellowstone 6 B. 02 UM CF (Incl. Salmon id - Margi nal) 11 to 6 No Change/ Probable Yellowstone R. Yellowstone Park to Laurel WTP. 2 B, Dl 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 Gil lings WTP to State Line (N. Dakota) 8 B,D3 UM CF (Non- Salmoni d) 8 to 8 No Change/ Questi onable 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, Dl GA LM(Not drinking) CF(Incl. Salmonid) 16 to NR Mo Change/ Questionable ------- TABLE 2 WATER QUALITY SUMMARY Projected Changes In State Watercourse Present Quality*and Uses , Changes In Past Five Years State Classification/ Will 1983 Goals Be Met? Montana From Li ttle B1 ack Foot R. to State Line (Idaho) 2 Bj D1 UM CF(Incl. Salmon id) 4 to 2 No Change/ Yes Powder R. 9 B, D3 UM CF(Non- Salmonid) 18 to 9 No Change/ Probable 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 Morth Dakota Missouri R. 2 I UM Native Fish 3 to 2 :,'o Change/ Yes Scuris R. 19 IA LM (UM with softening) Native Fish 18 to 19 No Change/ No Red Ri ver 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 WATER QUALITY SUMMARY 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 No Change/ Yes Cheyenne R. NY to Angostura Dam 14 5,8,9,10, 11 LM WF (Semi- permanent) 18 to 14 No Change/ No From Angostura Dam to Fal 1 R. NR 4,7,8,9, 10,11 LM(Not drinking) WF (Permanent) NR to NR No Change/ Probable From Fall R. to Missouri R. 7 5,7,8, 9,10,11 LM(Not drinking) WF (Semi- permanent) 9 to 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/ Probabl e From Sioux Falls to Klondike Dam 22 5,8,9,10,11 LM WF (Semi- permanent) MR to 22 No Change/ Probable ------- TABLE 2 WATER QUALITY SUMMARY cn State Watercourse Present Quality*and Uses Changes In Past Five Years 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/ Probable James R. N.D. to Diversion Dam 12 5,8,9,10,11 LM WF (Semi- permanent) 11 to 12 Mo Change/ Questionable 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 Mo 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 Mo Change/ Probable ------- TABLE 2 WATER QUALITY SUMMARY 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 lake 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 NR 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/ P rofcable ------- TABLE 2 WATER QUALITY SUMMARY Projected Changes In State Watercourse Present Quality*and Uses Changes In Past Five Years State Classification/ Will 1983 Goals Be Met? Utah Utah Lake NO C LM (For drinking) Fish Propagation & perpetuation MR 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 Can',5 Fish) MR to 1 No Change/ Yes Powder R. 10 I CF WF (Natural Game Fish) NR to 10 No Change/ Questionable 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 MR - Not 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 Watejr Quality Index (Index). Index data were supplemented by each states 305(b) reports and other pertinent data. The State of Colorado also*"developed an index, but it rated baslnwide water quality and accounted for the quality of mainstems and tributaries. COLORADO South Platte River The upper segment of the South Platte 1s dominated by three major Impoundments with flow augmented by Intermittent transmountain diversions from the Colorado River Basin. There 1s large scale use of irrigation and seasonally related return flows. Below South Platte, Colorado, the river 1s 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 coHform violations, and has had severe heavy metals and unionized ammonia events. Spill related f1sh kills have occurred 1n 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. IB ------- Colorado River The segment of the Colorado River above Grand Valley 1s 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 1s 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 1f 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 1s good to excellent and unlimited use for recreation is probable, however f1sh perpetuation and propaga- tion 1s 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 1s dominated by numerous storage reservoirs, trans- mountain diversions, and mining activities. The lower segment 1s 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 1n the upper segment. Low flows and poor channel characteristics contribute to problems. If the lower reach is reclassified and or 1f flow is augmented the fish and man-related goals of 1983 should be met. 19 ------- Green River Rated as generally excellent this short reach 1s 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 1s warranted but it 1s probable that 1983 goals will be met. North Platte Water quality 1s affected by Irrigation use and subsequent return flows, as well as transmountaln diversions, storage reservoirs, cattle grazing and a fluorspar mining activity. Overall quality 1s 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 have 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. 20 ------- Additional Notes for Interpreting Figure 2 through 7 First data period- July 69 - July 72 Index number for— entire segment for first data period ^—\ Second data period July 71 - July 74 -Index number for entire segment for second data period Index number for individual station for first data period & ndex number for individual station for second data period 21 ------- PAGE NOT AVAILABLE DIGITALLY ------- MONTANA Missouri River Water quality from the headwaters to the Sun River is impacted by numerous reservoirs on the malnstem 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 1t 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 1s impacted by one major sewage treatment plant and one large copper refinery at Great Falls. Sediment contribution from the Sun River 1s 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 1s 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 conform violations have been noted. Data are lacking to determine trends or to positively assess whether the upper segment will meet 1983 goals, how- ever it is probable that 1t 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. 23 ------- 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 coHform violations and the presence of oil and grease could interfere. In addition to the upstream effects noted above, the Yellowstone River from BilUngs 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 1s 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 1t ques- tionable that 1983 goals will be met. Between Cottonwood Creek and the Little Blackfoot River water quality 1s 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 found to have a high eutrophlc potential, this reach has noted low D.O.'s during non-ice cover conditions. Salinity and collform violations were frequent. It 1s 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 1n excessive quantities. Scattered violations of collform standards were observed above Missoula. Data are 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 both Noxon Rapids and Cabinet George Dams. With continued pollution abatement emphasis this segment will meet 1983 goals. 24 ------- Powder River Quality from the Wyoming border to Yellowstone River 1s affected by diversions for Irrigation, storage reservoirs and non-point sources. CoHform data 1s lacking. Severe salinity and heavy metal problems have been observed. Marginal quality 1s Indicated by Index analyses. In the absence of adequate conform data, or significant sources of bacterial contanmlnation 1t 1s 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 1n 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-stat1on, segment-by-segment basis. 25 ------- 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 WilHston and below Garrlsion 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 1s 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 Minot 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 Minot 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 1n 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 1s questionable 1f this watercourse will meet 1983 goals. Some form of flow augmentation would be needed to supplement low flow periods. 27 ------- 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 Oakes. Frequent salinity excesses, Intensifying at and below Jamestown, were monitored. Scattered mercury, 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 1s needed. Figure 4 illustrates the water quality picture for North Dakota on a station-by-station, segment-by-segment basis. 28 ------- PAGE NOT AVAILABLE DIGITALLY ------- SOUTH DAKOTA Missouri River Water quality 1s 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 1s 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 1s Indicated in the reach above Big Bend Dam. This reach 1s 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 1n 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 col 1 form 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 are 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. 30 ------- Big 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 mlmimum stream flow, control of non-point sources and adequate sewage treatment are provided. It is assumed that the River below Klondike Dam will meet the 1983 goals 1f upstream contltions 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 1s one major sewage treatment plant on the mainstem. Nutrients are abundant, and there have been violations of dissolved oxygen, salinity, manganese, total suspended sol Ids and iron. Available_ Index data indicate marginal quality and without available 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 one limiteH. Quality in this reach is primarily dependent uDon the upstream reach. Additional agricultural and feedlot operations place additional pressure on the stream from Huron to the Missouri River. Two major sewage 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. 31 ------- 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 are necessary before a firmer judqement 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. 32 ------- 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 1t 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 1s 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 1s a routine violation; chloride 1s sometimes violated; BOD is frequently 1n 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 1s doubtful however that the upper segment will meet 1983 goals. Continued management of water quality 1n 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 1s primarily affected by irrigation diversions and returns, storage reservoirs, and transmountain diversions in Colorado, and natural non-point sources. Non-point sources 34 ------- 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 1n significant amounts. Evaluation of data on the segment from the Colorado-Utah border to Moab Indicate that 1t 1s questionable 1f 1983 goals will be met unless effective non-point source controls are Implemented. Bear River There are limited data for the Rear 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, a 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 are 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, 1t 1s 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 1n 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. 35 ------- Green River Water quality 1n the upper reach is dominated by impoundment effects and inputs to the Flaming Gorge Reservoir. Transbasln diversions and diversions for Irrigation also affect quality 1n 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. 36 ------- PAGE NOT AVAILABLE DIGITALLY ------- WYOMING North Platte River The North Platte River Basin 1s the most densely populated area 1n 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. Groundwater 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 1n the basin. Salinity violations and euthrophic con- ditions are noted below Casper to the Nebraska border. The Index shows improvement and it 1s expected that this segment may meet 1983 goals, however, conditions below Capser 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, a 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 1n significant water quality problems. The water of the basin seems generally of good to excellent quality but this assessment must remain questionable until additionald data are 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 are requried 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 diversions 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 38 ------- also measured on the South Fork at Kaycee. It 1s questionable that this entire reach will meet 1983 goals without flow augmentation, although additional data are required before any clear assessment 1s 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. 39 ------- 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 1n the 1974 Needs Survey. Colorado provided estimates for municipal treatment plant capital costs, only, 1n the amount of $274 million by 1977 and an additional $41.8 million 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-po1nt 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. 41 ------- Chapter IV Non-point Sources The assessment of non-point sources (NPS) in Region VIII is 1n 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 1s 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 1s 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 analyses 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 1s irrigation return flows. Urban runoff 1s 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 1n specific locations. Good quantification of the salinity and acid mine drainage problems have been done in the Colorado drainage basin. 42 ------- Montana Sediments have been Identified as the major non-point pollutant throughout the State 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 1s 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 1n 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-bas1n basis. Several sources are identified, the majority of which are sources associated with agricultural activities. The non-point source summary contained 1n 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 is included. South Dakota In summarizing non-point sources pollution in South Dakota the most prevalent source 1s 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 1n 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 1n 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. 43 ------- Wyomi ng Irrigation return flows have been Identified as significant non- point sources throughout Wyoming. Overgrazed range is another signifi cant source of pollution found state-wide. These two 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. 44 ------- region VIII ------- |