COl1uubia River System 0peration Review Final Environmental Impact Statement

AppendixM Water Quality

us Co,ps gooM'I I'II of EnMmginyee rs ". " '.' North Pacific Division

DOEIEIS-O 1 70 November 1995 PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN THE SOR PROCESS

The Bureau of Reclamation. Corps of Engineers. and Bonneville Power Administration wish to thank those who reviewed the System Operation Review (SOR) Draft EIS and appendices for their comments. Your comments have provided valuable public, agency. and tribal input to the SOR NEPA process. Throughout the SORt we have made a continuing effort to keep the public informed and involved. Fourteen public scoping meetings were held in 1990. A series of public roundtables was conducted in November 1991 to provide an update on Lhe status of SOR studies. The lead agencies went back to most of the 14 communities in 1992 with 10 initial system operating strategies developed from the screening process. From those meetings and other consullalioDs, seven SOS a1ternatives (with options) were developed and subjected to full-scale analysis. The analysis results were presented in the Draft EIS released in July 1994. The lead agencies also developed alternatives for the other proposed SOR actions. including a Columbia River Regional Forum for assisting in the determination of future SOSs, Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement alternatives for power coordination. and Canadian Entitlement Allocation Agreements alternatives. A series of nine public meetings was held in September and October 1994 to present the Draft EIS and appendices and solicit public input on the SOR. The lead agencies-received 282 fonna1 written comments. Your comments have been used to revise and shape the alternatives presented in the Final EIS.

Regular newsletters on the progress of the SOR have been issued. Since 1990, 20 issues of Streamline have been sent to individuals. agencies, organizations. and tribes in the region on a mailing list of over 5,000. Several special publications explaining various aspects of the srudy have also been prepared and mailed to those on the mailing list. Those include: The Columbia River: A System Under Stress The Columbia River System: The [nside Story Screening Analysis: A Summary Screenj.ng Analysis: Volumes 1 and 2 Power System Coordination: A Guide to the Pacific Northwest Coordination Agreement Modeling the System: How Computers are Used in Columbia River Planning DailylHourly Hydrosystem Operation: How the Columbia River System Responds to Short-Term Needs Copies of these documents, the Final EIS, and other appendices can be obtained from any of the lead agencies, or from libraries in your area. Your questions and comments on these documents should be addressed to: SOR Intemgency Team P.O. Box 2988 Portland, OR 97208-2988 Water Quality Appendix

PREFACE: SETTING THE STAGE FOR THE SYSTEM OPERATION REVIEW

WHAT IS THE SOR AND WHY IS IT BEING new Canadian Entitlement Allocation Agreements CONDUCTED? (contracts that divide Canada's share of Columbia River 'freaty downstream power benefits and obliga­ The Columbia River System is a vast and complex tions among three participating public utility districts combination of Federal and non-Federal facilities and BPA). The review provides the environmental used for many purposes including power production, analysis required by the National Environmental irrigation, navigation, flood control, recreation, fish Policy Act (NEPA). and wildlife habitat and municipal and industrial water supply. Each river use competes for the This technical appendix addresses only the effects of I limited water resources in the Columbia River Basin. alternative system operating strategies for managing the Columbia River system. The environmental To date, responsibility for managing these river uses impact statement (EIS) itself and some of the other has been shared by a number of Federal, state, and appendices present analyses of the alternative local agencies. Operation of the Federal Columbia approaches to the other three decisions considered River system is the responsibility of the Bureau of as part of the SOR. Reclamation (Reclamation), Corps of Engineers WHO IS CONDUCTING THE SOR? (Corps) and Bonneville Power Administration (BPA). The SOR is a joint project of Reclamation, the Corps, and BPA-the three agencies that share The System Operation Review (SOR) is a study and responsibility and legal authority for managing the environmental compliance process being used by the Federal Columbia River System. The National three Federal agencies to analyze future operations Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), U.S. Fish and of the system and river use issues. The goal of the Wildlife Service (USFWS), and National Park Ser­ SOR is to achieve a coordinated system operation vice (NPS), as agencies with both jurisdiction and strategy for the river that better meets the needs of expertise with regard to some aspects of the SOR, all river users. The SOR began in early 1990, prior are cooperating agencies. They contribute informa­ to the filing of petitions for endangered status for tion, analysis, and recommendations where appropri­ several salmon species under the Endangered ate. The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) was also a Species Act. cooperating agency, but asked to be removed from that role in 1994 after assessing its role and the press The comprehensive review of Columbia River of other activities. operations encompassed by the SOR was prompted by the need for Federal decisions to (1) develop a HOW IS THE SOR BEING CONDUCTED? coordinated system operating strategy (SOS) for The system operating strategies analyzed in the SOR managing the multiple uses of the system into the could have significant environmental impacts. The 21st century; (2) provide interested parties with a study team developed a three-stage process-scop­ continuing and increased long-term role in system ing, screening, and full-scale analysis of the strate­ planning (Columbia River Regional Forum); (3) gies-to address the many issues relevant to the renegotiate and renew the Pacific Northwest Coor­ SOR. dination Agreement (PNCA), a contractual arrange­ ment among the region's major hydroelectric-gen­ At the core of the analysis are 10 work groups. The erating utilities and affected Federal agencies to work groups include members of the lead and coop­ provide for coordinated power generation on the erating agencies, state and local government agen­ Columbia River system; and (4) renew or develop cies, representatives of Indian tribes, and members

1995 FINALEIS •

Water Quality Appendix

of the public. Each of these work groups has a created for 10 resource areas and several single river use (resource) to consider. support functions. The work groups devel­ oped computer screening models and applied Early in the process during the screening phase, the them to the 90 alternatives identified during 10 work groups were asked to develop an alternative screening. They compared the impacts to a for project and system operations that would provide baseline operating year-1992-and ranked the greatest benefit to their river use, and one or each alternative according to its impact on more alternatives that, while not ideal, would pro­ their resource or river use. The lead agen­ vide an acceptable environment for their river use. cies reviewed the results with the public in a Some groups responded with alternatives that were series of regional meetings in September evaluated in this early phase and, to some extent, 1992. influenced the alternatives evaluated in the Draft and Final EIS. Additional alternatives came from • Full-Scale Analysis-Based on public com­ scoping for the SOR and from other institutional ment received on the screening results, the sources within the region. The screening analysis study team sorted, categorized, and blended studied 90 system operation alternatives. the alternatives into seven basic types of operating strategies. These alternative Other work groups were subsequently formed to strategies, which have multiple options, were provide projectwide analysis, such as economics, then subjected to detailed impact analysis. river operation simulation, and public involvement. 1\venty-one possible options were evaluated. Results and tradeoffs for each resource or The three-phase analysis process is described river use were discussed in separate technical briefly below. appendices and summarized in the Draft EIS. Public review and comment on the • Scoping/Pilot Study-After holding public Draft EIS was conducted during the summer meetings in 14 cities around the region, and coordinating with local, state, and Federal and fall of 1994. The lead agencies adjusted the alternatives based on the comments, agencies and Indian tribes, the lead agencies eliminating a few options and substituting established the geographic and jurisdictional new options, and reevaluated them during scope of the study and defined the issues that the past 8 months. Results are summarized would drive the EIS. The geographic area in the Final EIS. for the study is the Columbia River Basin (Figure P-l). The jurisdictional scope of Alternatives for the Pacific Northwest Coordination the SOR encompasses the 14 Federal proj­ Agreement (PNCA), the Columbia River Regional ects on the Columbia and lower Snake Rivers Forum (Forum), and the Canadian Entitlement that are operated by the Corps and Reclama­ Allocation Agreements (CEAA) did not use the tion and coordinated for hydropower under three-stage process described above. The environ­ the PNCA. BPA markets the power pro­ mental impacts from the PNCA and CEAA were not duced at these facilities. A pilot study ex­ significant and there were no anticipated impacts amining three alternatives in four river re­ from the Regional Forum. The procedures used to source areas was completed to test the deci­ analyze alternatives for these actions are described sion analysis method proposed for use in the in their respective technical appendices. SOR. For detailed information on alternatives presented • Screening-Work groups, involving regional in the Draft EIS, refer to that document and its experts and Federal agency staff, were appendices.

ii FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix

WHAT SOS ALTERNATIVES ARE CONSIDERED in 1992 after three species of salmon were listed IN THE FINAL EIS? under ESA.

Seven alternative System Operating Strategies (SOS) SOS 2d [New] 1994-98 Biological Opinion repre­ were considered in the Draft EIS. Each of the seven sents the 1994-98 Biological Opinion operation that SOSs contained several options bringing the total includes up to 4 MAF flow augmentation on the number of alternatives considered to 21. Based on Columbia, flow targets at McNary and Lower Gran­ review of the Draft EIS and corresponding adjust­ ite, specific volume releases from Dworshak, Brown­ ments, the agencies have identified 7 operating lee, and the Upper Snake, meeting sturgeon flows 3 strategies that are evaluated in this Final EIS. out of 10 years, and operating lower Snake projects Accounting for options, a total of 13 alternatives is at MOP and John Day at MIP. now under consideration. Six of the alternatives remain unchanged from the specific options consid­ SOS 4c [Rev.] Stable Storage Operation with Modi­ ered in the Draft EIS. One is a revision to a pre­ fied Grand Coulee Flood Control attempts to viously considered alternative, and the rest represent achieve specific monthly elevation targets year round replacement or new alternatives. The basic catego­ that improve the environmental conditions at stor­ ries of SOSs and the numbering convention remains age projects for recreation, resident fish, and wild­ the same as was used in the Draft EIS. However, life. Integrated Rules Curves (IRCs) at Libby and because some of the alternatives have been dropped, Hungry Horse are applied. the numbering of the final SOSs are not consecutive. There is one new SOS category, Settlement Discus­ SOS Sb Natural River Operation draws down the sion Alternatives, which is labeled SOS 9 and re­ four lower projects to near river bed places the SOS 7 category. This category of alterna­ levels for four and one-half months during the tives arose as a consequence of litigation on the spring and summer salmon migration period, by 1993 Biological Opinion and ESA Consultation for assuming new low level outlets are constructed at 1995. each project.

The 13 system operating strategies for the Federal SOS Sc [New] Permanent Natural River Operation Columbia River system that are analyzed for the operates the four lower Snake River projects to near Final EIS are: river bed levels year round.

SOS la Pre Salmon Summit Operation represents SOS 6b Fixed Drawdown Operation draws down the operations as they existed from around 1983 through four lower Snake River projects to near spillway the 1990-91 operating year, prior to the ESA listing crest levels for four and one-half months during the of three species of salmon as endangered or threat­ spring and summer salmon migration period. ened. SOS 6d Lower Granite Drawdown Operation draws SOS Ib Optimum Load-Following Operation down Lower Granite project only to near spillway represents operations as they existed prior to crest level for four and one-half months. changes resulting from the Regional Act. It attempts to optimize the load-following capability of the SOS 9a [New] Detailed Fishery Operating Plan system within certain constraints of reservoir opera­ includes flow targets at The Dalles based on the tion. previous year's end-of-year storage content, specific volumes of releases for the Snake River, the SOS 2c Current Operation/No-Action Alternative drawdown of Lower Snake River projects to near represents an operation consistent with that speci­ spillway crest level for four and one-half months, fied in the Corps of Engineers' 1993 Supplemental specified spill percentages, and no fish transporta­ EIS. It is similar to system operation that occurred tion.

1995 FINALEIS iii Water Quality Appendix

SOS 9b [New] Adaptive Management establishes I. Power flow targets at McNary and Lower Granite based on J. Recreation runoff forecasts, with specific volumes of releases to meet Lower Granite flow targets and specific spill K. Resident Fish percentages at run-of-river projects. L. Soils, Geology, and Groundwater

SOS 9c [New] Balanced Impacts Operation draws M. Water Quality down the four lower Snake River projects near N. Wildlife spillway crest levels for two and one-half months O. Economic and Social Impacts during the spring salmon migration period. Refill p. begins after July 15. This alternative also provides Canadian Entitlement Allocation 1994-98 Biological Opinion flow augmentation, Agreements integrated rule curve operation at Libby and Hungry Q. Columbia River Regional Forum Horse, a reduced flow target at Lower Granite due R. Pacific Northwest Coordination Agree- to drawdown, winter drawup at Albeni Falls, and ment spill to achieve no higher than 120 percent daily average for total dissolved gas. S. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Coor- dination Act Report SOS PA Preferred Alternative represents the opera­ T. Comments and Responses tion proposed by NMFS and USFWS in their Bio­ logical Opinions for 1995 and future years; this SOS Each appendix presents a detailed description of the operates the storage projects to meet flood control work group's analysis of alternatives, from the rule curves in the fall and winter in order to meet scoping process through full-scale analysis. Several spring and summer flow targets for Lower Granite appendices address specific SOR functions and McNary, and includes summer draft limits for (e.g., River Operation Simulation), rather than the storage projects. individual resources, or the institutional alternatives (e.g., PNCA) being considered within the SOR. The WHAT DO THE TECHNICAL APPENDICES technical appendices provide the basis for develop­ COVER? ing and analyzing alternative system operating strategies in the EIS. The EIS presents an inte­ This technical appendix is 1 of 20 prepared for the grated review of the vast wealth of information SOR. They are: contained in the appendices, with a focus on key A. River Operation Simulation issues and impacts. In addition, the three agencies B. Air Quality have prepared a brief summary of the EIS to high­ light issues critical to decision makers and the C. Anadromous Fish & Juvenile Fish public. Transportation There are many interrelationships among the differ­ D. Cultural Resources ent resources and river uses, and some of the appen­ E. Flood Control dices provide supporting data for analyses presented F. Irrigation/Municipal and Industrial in other appendices. This Water Quality appendix Water Supply relies on supporting data contained in Appendices H and O. For complete coverage of all aspects of G. Land Use and Development water quality, readers may wish to review all three H. Navigation appendices in concert.

iv FINALEIS 1995 McNARY CHIEFJOSEPH ALBENI FALLS COIvmbla RIWr, Or~lhInglon Cof.umbia Rtftf, WliIhl'ng\on Pmd orwnle RJver, CorPI' of E('Ig1neen eorPl'of Engln ... c~ of Engu..ra II); Mf'ttcI: No...mb.. 6, 1~ 1n....-vJc:e AUlJutII20. ]1$5 t" Mf"VfC8 AprIl t. 1955 910.000 1d10Wlllli of CIaf*dtY 2_,DOO 1dJO.... of capedtJ 42.000 kJ~ of C:afI'IdtY- Protect UN_Include PQWW. recr.tJon, P«'tKt UIIH lndude po'IiII'fi'ar:td fKrHtIon Profr*d. ~ lnetude pDWItf. rac:r..tton. .... _on Ra.- ot- rfwt ~.... and flood eonIroI Rli1-ot-rf\oH dam A'ftBge.mn1lal cAlCharve 01 tOlPOO eta _ A~ anm.l

JOHN DAY • Coh."bli Rl¥e4'", OragmtW.. t\lnvton CorpI 01 Englrteers "MtYIct JUly 16, , .. 2y1eo,ooo JdIowatt8 of eapICIty PJOied taMS fndud. powW,~ . Run-d-rtftr.... dam _~..,rt\MI dlectaarge_"""­ of 112AOO cq

THEDAUES CaI"",,,,- Alwr. 0nIg0rtlWII~ C«poof£no_ HIJNGRY HORSE m MI"I'fee 11Sl l;nt>ptJtJ_of_"""3. Profect ...Jnduda~.~. --_F1Hi<).­lJu ...... I'll Red ...... In _0d0b0r2t, 1052 ....Run-of-~ dim 421POO 1dIoIaII. cl CllpadtJ • ....,...-. anrnlll dI~ of 17TJIOO eft PtafKt .-laeNd. power, rKl'Mdon, na....,. .. flood c:ontrot., MCI krtptIoft Awr8ge IftmaII cft&Charge.of 3,517 ds BONNEVlUE 3..11 mllllan. .,.-Jrtet or sIotIIge In Co*wnbl. RIftt, OregorJ"whh ..1Oi1 -- C«po"~ ...... In ~ Jun. e.n. -- 1.D5O.OOD kltowdl: of capadty P?otId .... Inchld. power. ~on. CI ...., Rtwr (NDftb Fork). JdMo C«poel_ Ibft-OI-rfnr dam .... M ~ IIerch 1, 1871 Avemoe- MIt_ dJsdwge af 1a,MlO eta -~-P~"'lndUUpGIIIr.~.. twrtptioft.._.... lind tJood- contn:rl ICEHARBOR A.,.,.. annuM ~ ou. eft; $nUit fUftr, WnhfngIoo '2:.G2 mtnIoft ~-tMt cst.,..,. In C«po .....-­ *"...w:. o.e.m • .l' Ullia1 _~I_of"""'" Profed *"" Inctuct. JICI"R'f. ~n , -- LOWER MONUMENTAL LOWER GIIIINIT£ Run.... -ot-rlwr 8m ~ .. RMr, w..hlngixt SMICa...,...W""1ngIon an.M Nwr, Wash~ A""'P- 1M_ dllIChIirp of 47,eeo eta Corpt, 01 £ng~ CGrpI Of EngtnMfS Coc'p& 01 EttoI-- InAfVfceMly28. 1M9 In.....sc. ..., ~ lV7D 1n~~3.1.7S ato,ooo 'diow.u. Of c:apIICHJ .10.000 IdJoRIIa at c:aptCIty' .,~ 1dI0WII&Ia at ~ ProfKt --~ fICIWJW,~ ~ ~ tndud. po-'. t-=. nI1Cc PtofKt--lndudepawer,~ .... and 1IPftdan· naMptJon" .net tmpIan RuIJ-ot-tfwr dam Run-of-rfww c&.m JMt-oif-rl¥er datil: _ - A,....lf\ftWf~Of ... A..,..,. anNa! c:hc:fMfge of 47~7D ds A~ IMUlI ~of 47,230 ds _c:b

1 mllion &C18 feet = 1234 bilion cubfc meters 1 cubic loot pet second :::: 0.028 cubic meters per second Figure P-1. Projects in the System Operation Review. Water Quality Appendix

SUMMARY

Water is what people everywhere associate with the It was suggested that programs be implemented to Pacific Northwest. Every other resource evaluated in educate the public, water users, and natural resource the System Operation Review either influences or is managers about water quality issues. Establishment of influenced by water quality. a Columbia River Basin Authority for measuring and monitoring water quality was proposed. The use of Analysis of water quality begins with an account of Canadian treaty water to control pollution was recom­ the planning and evaluation process, and continues mended. Water quality studies were requested. Priority with a description of existing water quality conditions was given to maintaining high water quality for ana­ in the Columbia River Basin. This is followed by an dromous fish and reducing wasteful irrigation practices. explanation how the analysis was conducted. The analysis concludes with an assessment of the effects 5-1.2 Areas of Controversy of SOR alternatives on water quality, Chapter 4, and a comparison of alternatives, Chapter 5. There is some disagreement about the validity and reliability of models used to analyze some 30 water 5-1 DEFINITION AND BACKGROUND quality parameters. This is primarily due to the insufficiency of information about water quality S-1.1 Water Quality Issues Raised During problems other than temperature and dissolved gas Scoping saturation (see discussion below). Predictions about the future condition of water in the Columbia River There is strong support for improved water quality Basin differed based on speCUlation about pending in the Northwest. This was revealed in public regulation, pollution abatement methods, and meetings, correspondence, and personal communica­ irrigation practices. tions associated with scoping for the System Operations Review. S-2 MAJOR CONCLUSIONS OF THE WORK GROUP Citing the importance of water quality to human health, fish, wildlife, and economic growth, many S-2.1 Findings people sought inclusion of the resource in the SOR. Water quality issues which were raised included: To a varying degree, all of the SOR alternatives affect water quality. However, the ability to remedy existing watershed conditions; and future water quality problems by altering system operations is limited. None of the alternatives eva­ pollution from industry, particularly pulp and luated would completely control water temperature, paper mills; because of physical project limitation. All alternatives discharge of municipal sewage; call for some spill and, hence, would continue to cause high dissolved gas saturation levels. Lower Snake River stream siltation; reservoir drawdown alternatives would create signifi­ cant bank and mud flats erosion, although the impacts elevated water temperature; of sediments resuspended and transported during this operation are not expected to extend beyond McNary return flows from irrigated land, frequently Dam. None of the alternatives would create additional laden with pesticides and herbicides; dredging for navigation. Many of the alternatives dissolved gas saturation; calling from drastic changes in water flow and circula­ tion patterns could affect existing federal permits condition of domestic drinking water. issued under NPDES and the Clean Water Act.

1995 FlNALEIS vii Water Quality Appendix

Predicted water quality impacts are graphically may need to be different from that used in an aver­ summarized in Figure 5-5 on page 5-17. age year, because of variability in water quality data.

5-2.2 Choice Among Alternatives 5-2.3 Recommendations for Future Study or Referral to Appropriate Agencies Adverse impacts on water temperature could be 1. A more comprehensive, whole river water reduced if enough cool water was stored in quality study of the Columbia River Basin reservoirs for use in the summer season. Dissolved would fill current knowledge gaps and increase gas supersaturation problems would not exist if spill the chance of success of future water quality could be eliminated entirely. Sediment transport and improvement programs. There is a continuing high turbidity would not occur if reservoir pools did need to know and to closely monitor progress not fluctuate below normal operating range, leaving made in protecting and enhancing water normally submerged banks exposed to the natural quality in the Pacific Northwest. elements. Most water quality problems would not be serious if sufficient flows could be maintained The absence of data was particularly acute in year-round to dilute or assimilate contaminants. the realm of industrial and agricultural pollution. Information about the concentra­ A water quality alternative meeting all these tions and possible movement of trace metals, requirements could not be formulated because of the dioxin, radionuclides, fertilizer, and pesticides physical properties of structures on the river and is incomplete or missing. The return of water conflicts in the requirements of different water into the river from irrigated agricultural lands users. Although slightly more favorable conditions is a major concern. Insufficient data made were observed for water temperature and total reliable modelling of these problems difficult dissolved gas in pre-Endangered Species Act or impossible. Also needed is a better operations than in the base case alternatives, only understanding of the interaction of contami­ the natural river options produced more visible nants and river processes. Recommendations improvements in those two areas. for improving these limitations are given in Chapter 5. The natural river option imposes no restriction on flow and sediment movement and, therefore, 2. Mitigation measures to minimize adverse eliminates spill during the time window the Lower impacts on fish and aquatic life should include Snake River reservoirs are drawdown to river bed facilities to reduce water temperature and total level. It can still rely on headwater storage projects dissolved gas saturation, where feasible, and to provide sustained minimum flows. Increased bank new strategies for protecting anadromous fish and mud flats erosion and sediment transport, during periods of high water temperature and however, would increase turbidity, and nutrients and high dissolved gas saturation. contaminants concentration in the lower Snake River and further downstream for some period of 3. Since water quality problems are caused by time. Providing the required bank protection and sources both internal and external to the coping with increased sediment loading could be streams, they should be resolved jointly by cost -prohibitive. project owners and operators; relevant state, municipal, and federal regulatory agencies; and Given these considerations, a combination of alter­ the public. Point and nonpoint source and natives built around the natural river option is more extra-basin pollution, and dredging require­ likely to be best for water quality. Any such combina­ ments for navigation need to be taken into tion would need to take into account impacts to oth­ account. Education programs are needed to er water users as well. Even within a given alterna­ improve public understanding of reservoir tive, system regulation during extreme flow years operating policies and regional and local issues.

viii FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter!Para

1 SCOPE AND PROCESS ...... •••..••.•..•...... 1-1 1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF WATER QUALITY ISSUES ...... 1-1 1.1.1 Known Historical Water Quality Issues ...... 1-1 1.1.2 Water Quality issues raised by the public and agency coordination ...... 1-1 1.1.2.1 Public Scoping ...... 1-1 1.1.2.2 Agency Water Quality Letter Survey of Professionals ...... 1-3 1.1.2.3 Water Quality Work Group Scoping ...... 1-3 1.1.3 Areas of Controversy ...... 1-5 1.2 DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OF WATER QUALITY APPENDIX ...... 1-5 1.2.1 Development of the Work Group ...... 1-6 1.2.2 Coordination with Other Work Groups ...... 1-6 1.3 SCREENING ANALYSIS ...... 1-7 1.4 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES ...... 1-7 1.5 FULL-SCALE ANALYSIS ...... 1-7 2 WATER QUALITY IN THE COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN TODAY .....••••.••.••.•••. 2-1 2.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 2-1 2.2 ACTIVITIES AFFECTING WATER QUALITY ...... 2-1 2.3 RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND GROUPS ...... 2-8 2.3.1 Federal, State, and Local Agencies ...... 2-8 2.3.2 Citizen Involvement Organizations and Programs ...... 2-9 2.4 LAW, REGULATIONS, AND PROGRAMS RELATED TO WATER QUALITY .. . 2-11 2.5 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS ...... 2-13 2.6 WATER QUALITY STUDIES ...... 2-15 2.6.1 General Studies ...... 2-15 2.6.2 Specific Water Quality Studies ...... 2-17 2.7 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 2-19 2.7.1 Reach-by-reach Description ...... 2-19 2.7.2 Water Quality Concerns by Subbasin ...... 2-27 2.8 BASINWIDE STATUS OF WATER QUALITY ...... 2-30 2.9 CONCLUSIONS ...... 2-32 3 STUDY METHODS AND SCREENING RESULTS •.•...... 3-1 3.1 GENERAL METHODOLOGY ...... 3-1 3.1.1 Modeling Concepts ...... 3-1 3.1.2 Analytical Scope and Constraints ...... 3-2 3.1.3 Assumptions ...... 3-10

1995 FINALEIS ix TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Quality Appendix

TABLE OF CONTENTS - CONT

Chapter/Para Page 3.2 SCREENING ANALYSIS ...... 3-10 3.2.1 Screening Methodology and Models ...... 3-10 3.2.2 OveIView of Initial Screening ...... 3-10 3.2.3 ObseIVations and Recommendations arising from Screening ...... 3-11 3.3 FULL-SCALE ANALYSIS ...... 3-14 3.3.1 Methodology/Models Used ...... 3-14 3.3.2 Performance indices ...... 3-24 3.3.3 Full-scale Analysis Results ...... 3-25 4 ALTERNATIVES AND THEIR IMPACTS ON WATER QUALITY •.•••.•..•..•••••.. 4-1 4.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES ...... 4-1 4.1.1 SOS 1-Pre-ESA Operation ...... , ...... 4-14 4.1.2 SOS 2-Current Operations ...... 4-14 4.1.3 SOS 4-Stable Storage Project Operation ...... 4-15 4.1.4 SOS 5-Natural River Operation ...... 4-15 4.1.5 SOS 6-Fixed Drawdown ...... 4-15 4.1.6 SOS 9-Settlement Discussion Alternatives ...... 4-16 4.1.7 SOS PA-Preferred Alternative ...... 4-16 4.1.8 Rationale for Selection of the Final SOSs ...... 4-17 4.2 POTENTIAL WATER QUALITY IMPACTS ...... 4-20 4.3 PREDICTED EFFECTS AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE ...... 4-28 4.3.1 Direct Effects on Water Temperature and Total Dissolved Gas ...... 4-28 4.3.2 Effects on Sediments ...... 4-39 4.3.3 Indirect Effects ...... 4-43 4.3.4 Efficiency of Alternatives ...... 4-44 4.3.5 Short-term Versus Long-term Perspectives ...... 4-45 4.3.6 Possible Conflicts ...... 4-45 4.3.7 Mitigation Measures ...... 4-45 4.3.8 Unavoidable Adverse Effects ...... 4-47 5 COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES .•....•..•....•..•.•••••.•..•••..••..•.•••. 5-1 5.1 BASIS FOR COMPARISON ...... 5-1 5.1.1 Comparison Criteria ...... 5-1 5.1.2 Alternatives Comparison ...... 5-2 5.2 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MITIGATION ...... 5-18 5.2.1 Findings ...... 5-18 5.2.2 Recommendations for Mitigation ...... 5-19 6 LIST OF PREPARERS .••...•.....•...... •....•...... •..•.••••••.•.. 6-1 7 GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ACRONYMS ...•...... ••...... •....••....•..•. 7-1 8 REFERENCES ...... •..•...•....•••...... ••...... ••. 8-1

x FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS - CONT

Chapter/Para

A WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS OF SIGNIFICANCE TO COLUMBIA RIVER SYSTEM OPERATION REVIEW ...... A-I A-I Definition and Background ...... A-I B-1 HISTORICAL AND CURRENT WATER QUALITY CONDITIONS ...... B-1 B-1 INTRODUCTION ...... B-1 B-2 METHODS ...... B-1 B-2.1 DATA SOURCES ...... B-1 B-2.1.1 Corps Database ...... B-2 B-2.1.2 USGS Database ...... B-2 B-2.1.3 WDOE Database ...... B-2 B-2.1.4 EPA Database ...... B-2 B-2.2 TEMPORAL AND SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF DATA ...... B-2 B-2.2.1 Sampling Frequency ...... B-3 B-2.2.2 Parameter Analysis Frequency ...... B-3 B-2.2.3 Water Quality Parameter Ranges ...... B-3 B-2.3 TREND ANALYSIS ...... B-3 B-3 RESULTS ...... B-4 B-3.1 SAMPLING AND PARAMETER ANALYSIS FREQUENCY '" ...... B-4 B-3.1.1 Columbia River ...... B-4 B-3.1.2 Snake River ...... B-6 B-3.1.3 Clearwater River ...... B-7 B-3.1.4 Yakima River ...... B-7 B-3.1.5 Spokane River ...... B-8 B-3.1.6 Pend Oreille River ...... B-8 B-3.1.7 Flathead River ...... B-8 B-3.1.8 Kootenai River ...... B-8 B-3.2 PARAMETER ANALYSIS FREQUENCY SUMMARY ...... B-8 B-4 PARAMETER RANGES ...... B-8 B-5 HISTORIC TRENDS ...... B-9 B-6 DISCUSSION ...... B-20 B-6.1 EXISTING DATA ADEQUACY ...... B-20 B-6.2 BASIN - WIDE ANALYSIS OF PARAMETERS ...... B-20 B-6.2.1 Dissolved Oxygen ...... B-20

1995 FINALEIS xi TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Quality Appendix

TABLE OF CONTENTS - CONT

Chapter/Para

B-6.2.2 Turbidity and Suspended Sediments ...... B-2l B-6.2.3 Conductivity/Salinity/Hardness ...... B-22 B-6.2.4 pH ...... B-22 B-6.2.5 Ammonia ...... B-22 B-6.2.6 Nitrite Plus Nitrate ...... B-24 B-6.2.7 Ortho-Phosphorate ...... B-24 B-6.2.S Total Phosphorus ...... B-24 B-6.3 LOWER COLUMBIA ...... B-25 B-7 REFERENCES ...... B-25

C OPERATIONAL AND STRUCTURAL WATER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT TECHNIQUES ..•...... ••...... ••.••.••....•. C-l C-l RULE CURVE CHANGE ...... C-l C-2 INFLOW ROUTING ...... C-l C-3 CONCENTRATION OF FLOW THROUGH ONE GATE ...... C-l C-4 SELECTIVE WITHDRAWAL ...... C-l C-5 PNEUMATIC DESTRATIFICATION ...... C-2 C-6 UNDERWATER ...... C-2 C-7 EMPTYING INDIVIDUAL RESERVOIRS EVERY DECADE ...... C-2 C-S USE OF SURFACE WATER PUMPS ...... C-2 C-9 SINGLE-PURPOSE SYSTEM OPERATION ...... C-2 C-9.l Power Generation ...... C-3 C-9.l.l Nonstructural Alternatives ...... C-3 C-9.1.2 Structural Alternatives ...... C-3 C-9.2 Irrigation ...... C-3 C-9.2.l Nonstructural Alternatives ...... C-3 C-9.2.2 Structural Alternatives ...... C-4 C-9.3 Flood Damage Reduction ...... C-4 C-9.3.l Structural Alternatives ...... C-4 C-9.3.2 Nonstructural Alternatives ...... C-5 C-9.4 Navigation ...... C-5 C-9.4.1 Nonstructural Alternatives ...... C-5 C-9.4.2 Structural Alternatives ...... C-5 xii FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS - CONT

Chapter/Para

D RESULTS OF FULL-SCALE ANALYSIS WATER TEMPERATURE AND DISSOLVED GAS SATURATION D-l

E PREDICTED WATER TEMPERATURE PROFILES ...... •..•.•.•...... •...... E-l

F DESCRIPTION OF INDIVIDUAL DEEPWATER RESERVOIRS .•••...... F-l

G PREDICTION OF EROSION AND SEDIMENT TRANSPORT •...... •...... G-l G-l INTRODUCTION ...... G-2 G-2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE ...... G-2 G-3 CALIBRATION OF THE HEC-6 MODEL ...... G-2 G-4 DRAWDOWN MODELING USING HEC-6 ...... G-3 G-4.1 Development of Hydrographs ...... G-4 G-4.2 Development of Forebay Elevations for the drawdown ...... G-5 G-4.3 Potential Erosion Limitation ...... G-5 G-5 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS ...... G-5 G-5.1 Comparison of Drawdown Alternatives ...... G-5 G-5.2 Shielding of Silt and Clay Deposits ...... G-5 G-5.3 Changes in transport with time and flow ...... G-6 G-5.4 The effect of local inflow ...... G-7

H HEC-5Q MODEL CALIBRATION RESULTS ...... •.•.•..•...... ••...... H-l H-l HEC-5Q MODEL WATER QUALITY ...... H-l H-2 MODEL CALIBRATION AND SENSITIVITY ...... H-2 H-3 TEMPERATURE ...... H-3 H-4 TDS, CHLORIDES AND ALKALINITY ...... H-4 H-5 PLANT NUTRIENTS AND PHYTOPLANKTON ...... H-5 H-6 pH ...... H-5 H-7 SUSPENDED SEDIMENT ...... H-6 H-8 TOXIC POLLUTANTS ...... H-6 H-8.1 Heavy Metals and RadionucIides ...... H-6 H-8.2 Dioxins and Furnas and other Dissolved Chemicals ...... H-7 H-9 COMPREHENSIVE WATER QUALITY OPTION (SNAKE- COLUMBIA SYSTEM MODEL) ...... H-29 H-lO SAMPLES OF WATER TEMPERATURES PREDICTIONS ...... H-33

I GAS SPILL MODEL CALIBRATION RESULTS ...... •.•...... •... 1-1

1995 FINALEIS xiii TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Quality Appendix

TABLE OF CONTENTS - CONT

Chapter/Para

J SEDIMENT MODELING WITH THE ENHANCED HEC-SQ MODEL...... J-1 J-1 INTRODUCTION...... J-1 J-2 STUDY AREA AND PERIOD ...... J-1 J-3 THE FULL-SCALE WATER QUALITY MODEL...... J-1 J-4 MODEL APPLICATION LIMITS...... J-3 J-5 PROPOSED SOR OPERATION STRATEGIES...... J-3 SOS 1 - Pre - ESA Operation ...... J - 3 SOS 2 - Current Operations...... J - 3 SOS 3 - Flow Augmentation ...... J - 3 SOS 4 - Stable Storage Project Operation ...... J - 3 SOS 5 - Natural River Operation ...... J-4 SOS 6 - Fixed Drawdown ...... J-4 SOS 7 - Federal Resource Agency Operations...... J-4 J-6 CONCEPTUAL MODEL...... J-4 J-7 SIMULATION PERIOD ...... J-4 J-8 PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL, AND BIOLOGICAL PROCESSES...... J-4 J-8.1 Hydrology ...... , ...... J-4 J-8.1.1 HEC-5Q - HYDROSIM Consistency...... J-5 J-8.1.2 Worst Case Conditions ...... J-5 J-8.1.3 Computational Time-Step...... J-5 J-8.2 Meteorology ...... '" ...... J-5 J - 8.3 Sedimentation and Turbidity ...... J - 5 J -8.3.1 Bank Erosion and Bed Scour ...... J-6 J -8.3.2 Sediment Deposition...... J-6 J - 8.3.3 Computational Duration ...... J -7 J-8.4 Bio-Chemical Parameters...... J-7 J -8.4.1 Nutrients and Phytoplankton ...... J-8 J-8.4.2 Toxic Pollutants...... J-8 J - 8.4.3 Toxic Sediments and Reservoir Drawdown ...... J - 8 J-9 MODEL COMPONENTS AND DATA FLOW ...... J-10 J-10 HEC-6 SIMULATIONS ...... J-lO

xiv FINAL EIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS - CONT

Chapter/Para

J-11 SEDIMENT INPUT PREPROCESSING ...... J-lO J-12 COL19 MASTER FILE ...... J-12 J-13 INITIAL CONDITIONS ...... J-12 J-14 ENHANCED HEC-5Q ...... J-12 J-15 HEC-5Q OUTPUT FILES ...... J-13 J-16 LONGITUDINAL PROFILE PLOTTING ...... J-13 J-17 WATER QUALITY DATABASE ...... J-13 J-18 INITIAL SCREENING OF TOXINS ...... J-13 J-19 TRIBUTARY / HEADWATER WATER COLUMN DATA ...... J-14 J-20 MAINSTEM BED SEDIMENT DATA ...... J-14 J-21 WATER QUALITY DATA AVAILABILITY ...... J-14 J-21.1 Estimation of Algal Data ...... J-14 J-21.2 Estimation of Organic Parameter Data ...... J-16 J-21.3 Estimation of Heavy Metal Parameter Data ...... J-17 J-22 RESULTS ...... J-17 J-23 RESULTS ANALYSIS AND SUMMARIZATION ...... J-17 J-23.1 Concentration Exceedence Duration ...... J-18 J-23.2 Longitudinal Concentration Profiles ...... J-18 J-23.3 Worst and Average Cases ...... J-18 J-24 ALGAE ...... J-18 J-25 AMMONIA AND NUTRIENTS ...... J-26 J-26 SEDIMENT ...... J-33 J-26.1 Silt, Sediment and Turbidity ...... J-34 J-26.3 Silt Exceedence Duration ...... J-37 J-26.4 Sediment Accumulation ...... J-42 J-27 LEAD ...... J-46 J-28 TOTALDDT ...... J-58 J-29 DISCUSSION ...... J-67 J-30 EXCEEDENCE THRESHOLDS ...... J-67 J-31 LEAD and DDT ...... J-67 J-32 LITERATURE CITED ...... J-70 K USE OF EXISTING HEC-5Q MODEL RESULTS FOR NEW SOR ALTERNATIVES. K-l

1995 FINALEIS xv TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Quality Appendix

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Chapter/Para

Jl SHORELINE EROSION MODEL METHODOLOGy...... J1-1 J1-1 INTRODUCTION...... J1-1 J1-2 SURFACE EROSION...... J1-2 J1-3 WAVE EROSION...... J1-3 J1-4 SLUMPING/SAPPING ...... J1-4 J1-5 TRIBUTARY INCISION ...... J1-4 J1-6 WATER AND SEDIMENT DISCHARGE INPUTS FOR HEC 6 AND HEC 5Q ... J1-5 J1-7 LITERATURE CITED...... J1-5 J2 TOXIC WATER QUALITY PARAMETER SCREENING...... J2-1

LIST OF TABLES

Table Title Page

1-1 Top 1\.venty Water Quality Parameters ...... 1-4 2-1 Site-Specific Studies in the Columbia Basin ...... 2-16 2-2 Water Quality Concerns by Subbasin (Source: EPA's letter report to NPPC, 1992) ...... 2-28 3 -1 Results of Alternatives Screening ...... 3 -12 3 - 2 Significance of Selected Years With Respect to Pool Elevation and Spill ...... 3 -15 3-3 Annual Run-off Magnitude at The Dalles, Priest Rapids, and Lower Granite Dams, 1929-1978...... 3-15 3 -4 Assumed Levels of Spill for-fish -passage (in ratio of daily average outflow) and Plant Capacity (in Kcfs) ...... 3-20 4-1 SOS Alternative-1 ...... 4-2 4-2 Summary of Alternatives in the Draft and Final EIS ...... 4-18 4-3 Location Abbreviations...... 4-29 4-4 Range of Maximum Observed TDG and Water Temperature (WT) during 1984-1991 (Instantaneous Values) ...... 4-30 4-5 Maximum Observed TDG and Water Temperature (WT) in 1992 (Instantaneous Values) ...... 4-32 4-6 Predicted Sediment Load at RM 120 ...... 4-43 4-7 Predicted Percent Exceedence for DDT, Total Lead, and Silt ...... 4-48 5 -1 Comparison Based on Average Number of Days Exceeding 17.2 _ C Water Temperature Per Station - Individual Years...... 5-3

xvi FINAL EIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES - CONT

Table Title

5 - 2 Comparison Based Average Number of Days Exceeding 17.2 _ C Water Temperature Per Station - All 5 Years Combined ...... 5-4 5 - 3 Comparison Based on Average Number of Days Exceeding 110% Total Dissolved Gas Saturation per Station - Grouping for Individual Years ...... 5-6 5-4 Comparison Based on Average Number of Days Exceeding 110% Total Dissolved Gas - Grouping for All 6 Years Combined ...... 5-7 5-5 Comparison Based on Total Dissolved Gas (120% Saturation Threshold) Grouping for Individual Years ...... 5-8 5-6 Comparison Based on Average Number of Days Exceeding 120% Total Dissolved Gas Saturation - All 6 Years Combined ...... 5-12 5 -7 Comparison Based on Average Number of Days Exceeding 130% Total Dissolved Gas Saturation Grouping for Individual Years ...... 5-13 5-8 Comparison Based on Average Number of Days Exceeding 110, 120 and 130% Total Dissolved Gas Saturation - Indices of Overall Impact ...... 5-14 5-9 Summary Comparison Based on Overall Performance Indices ...... 5-16 6-1 List of Preparers ...... 6-1 B-1 Long-Term Monitoring Site Sampling/Analysis Frequency Summary ...... B-9 B-2 Basin Wide Water Quality Parameter Statistics (EPA, Storet, 1974-1992, all Columbia/Snake River Mainstem Data) ...... B-10 B-3 Columbia Water Quality for Sites Warrendale and Vernita ...... B-59 B-4 Columbia Water Quality for Sites Umatilla and Rock Island ...... B-60 B-5 Columbia Water Quality for Sites McNary and Grand Coulee ...... B-61 B-6 Columbia Water Quality for Sites Richland, Abv. Snake and Northport ...... B-62 B-7 Snake River Water Quality for Sites Burbank and Lower Granite RM 107 ...... B-63 B-8 Snake River Water Quality for Sites Ice Harbor RM 18 and Lower Granite RM 120 ...... B-64 B-9 Snake River Water Quality for Sites Lower Monumental RM 44 and Anatone WA RM 167 ...... B-65 B -10 Snake River Water Quality for Sites Little Goose RM 83 and Weiser ID (RM351.3) ...... B-66 B -11 Clearwater and Yakima Water Quality Appendix for Sites Spaulding RM 11.6 and Kiona RM 29.9 (37A) ...... B-67 B-12 Yakima and Spokane Water Quality for Sites Parker 37 A190 and Riverside Stat ...... ' ...... B-68 B-13 Spokane and Pendorei Water Quality for Sites Post Falls 54A190 and Border 62A080 ...... B-69 B-14 Pend Oreille and Flathead River Water Quality for Sites Newport and Near Columbia Falls ...... B-70

1995 FINALEIS xvii TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Quality Appendix

LIST OF TABLES - CONT

Table Title

B-15 Kootenai Water Quality for Site Libby Dam, Near Libby, MT RM 221 ...... B-71 D-1. Number of Days Exceeding 17.2 Deg.C Temperature ...... D-1 D-2 Number of Days Exceeding 110,120, and 130 Pct. TDG Saturation ...... D-1O D-3 Difference in No. of Days >17.2 Deg. C between the Base Case (ALT.2c) and other alternatives, averages for 1929, 59, 62, 73, 74 ...... D-19 D-4 Difference in No. of Days> 17.2 Deg. C between the Base Case (ALT.2c) and other alternatives, highest numbers for 1929, 59, 62, 73, 74 ...... D-20 D-5 Difference in No. of Days> 17.2 Deg. C between the base case (ALT.2c) and other alternatives, lowest for 1929, 59, 62, 73, 74 ...... D-20 D-6 Difference in No. of Days> 17.2 Deg. C between the Base Case (ALT.2c) and other alternatives for 1929 (Low pool, High Temps) ...... D-21 D-7 Difference in No. of days> 17.2 Deg. C between the Base Case (ALT.2c) and other alternatives for 1962 (Ave. Pool, Ave. Temps) ...... D-21 D-8 Difference in No. of days> 17.2 Deg. C between the Base Case (ALT.2c) and other alternatives for 1974 (High Pool, Low Temps) ...... D-22 D-9 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 130 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives, 6-YR Averages ...... D-22 D -10 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 130 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives, Highest of 6-Yrs ...... D-23 D -11 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 130 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives, Lowest for 6-yrs ...... D-23 D -12 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 130 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives for 1974 (High TDG) ...... D-24 D -13 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 130 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives for 1959 (Average Water) ...... D-24 D-14 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 130 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives for 1973 (Low Flow) ...... D-25 D -15 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 120 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives, Average of 6-yrs ...... D-25 D -16 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 120 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives, Highest of 6-yrs...... D-26 D-17 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 120 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives, Lowest of 6-yrs...... D-26 D-18 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 120 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives for 1974 (High TDG) ...... D-27 D-19 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 120 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2) and Other Alternatives for 1959 (Ave. TDG) ...... D-27 D-20 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 120 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives for 1973 (Low TDG) ...... D-28

xviii FINALEIS 1995 •

Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES - CONT

Table Title

0-21 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 110 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives, Averages of 6-yrs ...... 0-28 0-22 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 110 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives, Highest of 6-yrs ...... 0-29 0-23 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 110 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives, Lowest of 6-yrs ...... 0-29 0-24 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 110 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives for 1974 (High TOG) ...... 0-30 0-25 Difference in TOG Number of Days Exceeding 110 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives for 1959(Av. TOG) ...... 0-30 0-26 Difference in Number of Days Exceeding 110 Pct Saturation Between the Base Case (Alt. 2c) and Other Alternatives for 1973 (Low Flow) ...... 0-31 E-1 Predicted Temperature Profiles for Libby Reservoir (Degrees C) ...... E-2 E-2 Temperature Profiles for Hungry Horse Reservoir (Degrees C) ...... E-3 H -1. Ranges of Observed Concentrations During the Summer Month of Selected Water Quality Parameters in the Stream and Reservoirs of the Columbia - Snake River System ...... H-8 H-2 Concentration of Point and Non-Point Inflow ...... H-10 I -1 Summary of C Values ...... 1-2 I -2 Precision of Model Calibration (5/15-7/26: 73 days) ...... 1-3 1-3 Nitrogen Forebay Saturation Plot - The Dalles ...... 1-4 I -4 Nitrogen Forebay Saturation Plot - Ice Harbor ...... 1-6 I -5 Nitrogen Forebay Saturation Plot - Priest Rapids ...... 1-8 I -6 Nitrogen Forebay Saturation Plot - The Dalles ...... 1-10 I -7 Nitrogen Forebay Saturation Plot - Ice Harbor ...... 1-12 1-8 Nitrogen Forebay Saturation Plot - Priest Rapids ...... 1-14 J -1 Tributary Inflow Concentrations Used in the HEC-5Q Model ...... J-15 J - 2 Potential Water Quality Issues and Available Data ...... J-16

LIST OF FIGURES

Title

2-1 The Columbia River Basin 2-3 2-2 US Columbia River and Lower Snake River Dams (Showing River Miles) ...... 2-5 2-3 1994 - Location of Dissolved Gas Monitoring Stations ...... 2-10

1995 FINALEIS xix -

TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Quality Appendix

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Title

2-4 The Columbia River and its Tributaries ...... 2-21 2-5 US Corps of Engineers North Pacific Division's Water Quality Concerns ...... 2-31 3-1 Sample Plot: Grand Coulee Reservoir Pool Elevations ...... 3-3 3-2 Sample Plot: Range of the Dalles Project Outflow for Various SOR Alternatives ... . 3-4 3-3 Sample Plot: The Dalles Spill ...... 3-5 3-4 Recommended Range of Water Temperatures for Snake River Anadromous Salmonids 3-8 3-5 Sample Plot of Predicted Daily Water Temperature ...... 3-26 3-6 Sample Plot of Predicted Total Dissolved Gas Saturation Ice Harbor Forebay, 1938 (average runoff) ...... 3-27 3-7 Sample Plot of Number of Days Exceeding Temperature Treshold at All Locations ... . 3-28 3-8 Sample Plot of Number of Days Exceeding Treshold at One Station () ...... 3-29 3-9 Sample Plot of Predicted Sediment Transport at Lower Granite Reservoir ...... 3-30 4-1 Dworshak Pool Elevation - 1929 (low flow year) ...... 4-21 4-2 Lower Granite Pool Elevation - 1929 (low flow year) ...... 4-22 4-3 Priest Rapids Outflow - 1929 (low flow year) ...... 4-23 4-4 Lower Granite Outflow - 1929 (low flow year) ...... 4-24 4-5 The Dalles Outflow - 1929 (low flow year) ...... 4-25 4-6 Daily Observed Total Dissolved Gas Saturation at Warrendale, ...... 4-33 4-7 Predicted Sediment Transport at Lower Granite Pool, 2-Month Drawdown, End of 5th Year ...... 4-40 4-8 Predicted Sediment Transport, Lower Granite Pool, 4-1/2 Month Drawdown, End of lst Year ...... 4-41 4-9 Predicted Sediment Transport, Lower Granite Pool, 4-1/2 Month Drawdown, End of 5th Year ...... 4-42 4-10 Predicted Percent Exceedence for DDT - Lower Granite (CP 50) ...... 4-49 4-11 Predicted Percent Exceedence for DDT - Ice Harbor (CP 80) ...... 4-50 5-1 Variation of Water Temperature Performance Index ...... 5-5 5-2 Variation of Total Dissolved Gas Performance Index, 110% Saturation 5-9 5-3 Variation of Total Dissolved Gas Performance Index, 120% Saturation 5-10 5-4 Variation of Total Dissolved Gas Performance Index, 130% Saturation 5-11 5-5 Comparison Summary for Water Temperature, Dissolved Gas, and Sediment Transport...... 5-17 B-1 Long-Term Water Quality Sampling Sites instream (*), and at Bureau of Reclamation and Corps of Engineers dams ...... B-5

xx FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Title

B-2 Columbia River Water Quality Historic Water Temperature ...... B-ll B-3 Columbia River Water Quality Historic Dissolved Oxygen ...... B-12 B-4 Columbia River Water Quality Historic Turbidity ...... B-13 B-5 Columbia River Water Quality Historic Conductivity ...... B-14 B-6 Columbia River Water Quality Historic pH ...... B-15 B-7 Columbia River Water Quality Historic Nitrite Plus Nitrate ...... B-16 B-8 Columbia River Water Quality Historic Ammonia ...... B-17 B-9 Columbia River Water Quality Historic Total Phosphorus ...... B-18 B-lO Mean weekly secchi depthl/ and river discharge at Lower Granite Dam ...... B-19 B-11 Yakima River Conductivity and Nitrite Plus Nitrite Profile ...... B-23 B-12 Columbia River DO (mg/l) ...... B-26 B-13 Columbia River Temperature (5C) ...... B-27 B-14 Snake River & Clearwater Temperature (5C) ...... B-28 B-15 Tributaries Temperature (5C) ...... B-29 B-16 Snake River & Clearwater DO (mg/I) ...... B-30 B-17 Tributaries DO (mg/I) ...... B-31 B-18 Columbia River Turbitity (NTU) ...... B-32 B -19 Snake River & Clearwater Turbitity (NTU) ...... B-33 B-20 Tributaries Turbitity (NTU) ...... B-34 B-21 Columbia River Suspended Sediment (mg/I) ...... B-35 B-22 Snake River & Clearwater, Suspended Sediment (mg/I) ...... B-36 B-23 Tributaries Suspended Sediment (mg/I) ...... B-37 B-24 Columbia River Conductivity (mho) ...... B-38 B-25 Snake River & Clearwater, Conductivity (mho) ..... " ...... B-39 B-26 Tributaries Conductivity (mho) ...... B-40 B-27 Columbia River pH ...... B-41 B-28 Snake River & Clearwater pH ...... B-42 B-29 Tributaries pH ...... B-43 B-30 Columbia River Hardness (mg/l) ...... B-44 B-31 Snake River & Clearwater Hardness (mg/I) ...... B-45 B-32 Tributaries Hardness (mg/I) ...... B-46

B-33 Columbia River N02 & N03 (mg/I) ...... B-47

1995 FINALEIS xxi -

TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Quality Appendix

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Title

B-34 Snake River & Clearwater N02 & N03 (mg/I) ...... B-48 B-35 Tributaries N02 & NO# (mg/I) ...... B-49 B-36 Columbia River NH3 & NH4 (mg/I) ...... B-50 B-37 Snake River & Clearwater NH3 & NH4 (mg/I) ...... B-51 B-38 Tributaries NH3 & NH4 (mg/I) ...... B-52 B-39 Columbia River Ortho Phosphate (mg/I) ...... B-53 B-40 Snake River & Clearwater Ortho Phosphate (mg/I) ...... B-54 B-41 Tributaries Ortho Phosphate (mg/I) ...... B-55 B-42 Columbia River Total Phosphate (mg/I) ...... B-56 B-43 Snake River & Clearwater Total Phosphate (mg/I) ...... B-57 B-44 Tributaries Total Phosphate (mg/I) ...... B-58 D-1 Water Temps:Predicted Changes from Base Case Year=Ave ...... D-32 D-2 Bon Water Temps:Predicted Changes from Base Case, Highest of 5 Years ...... D-33 D-3 Water Temps:Predicted Changes from Base Case, Lowest of 5 Years ...... D-34 D-4 The Dalles Water Temps:Predicted No. Days Exceeding 17.2 Deg. C ...... D-35 D-5 Priest Rapids Water Temps:Predicted No. Days Exceeding 17.2 Deg. C ...... D-36 D-6 Lower Granite Water Temps:Predicted No. Days Exceeding 17.2 Deg. C ...... D-37 D-7 Water Temps:Predicted Changes from Base Case, Year=1929 (Low Flow) ...... D-38 D-8 Water Temps:Predicted Changes from Base Case, Year= 1962 (Average Flow) ...... D-39 D-9 Water Temps:Predicted Changes from Base Case, Year= 1974 (High Flow) ...... D-40 D-lO Dissolved Gas Sat.:Predicted Changes from Base Case, 6-Year Ave, Base=120% ... . D-41 D-11 Dissolved Gas Sat.:Predicted Changes from Base Case, 6-Year High, Base= 120% .. . D-42 D-12 Dissolved Gas Sat.:Predicted Changes from Base Case, 6-Year Low, Base=120% ... . D-43 D-13 Priest Rapids Dissolved Gas Sat.:Predicted No. Days Exceeding 120% Threshold .... . D-44 D-14 Ice Harbor Dissolved Gas Sat.:Predicted No. Days Exceeding 120% Threshold ...... D-45 D-15 The Dalles Dissolved Gas Sat.:Predicted No. Days Exceeding 120% Threshold ...... D-46 D-16 Dissolved Gas Sat.:Predicted Changes from Base Case, 1973 (Medium Low Flow) ... . D-47 D-17 Dissolved Gas Sat.:Predicted Changes from Base Case, 1959 (Medium High Flow) ... . D-48 D-18 Dissolved Gas Sat.:Predicted Changes from Base Case, 1974 (High Flow Year) ...... D-49 E-1 Predicted Water Temperature Profiles ...... E-5 E-2 Libby Dam Discharge Temperature Hydrographs, Alt. 1a 1931 Mean Weather ...... E-6 E-3 Libby Dam Discharge Temperature Hydrographs, Alt. 1b 1931 (Low Flow) Mean Weather ...... E-7

xxii FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Figure Title

E-4 Libby Dam Discharge Temperature Hydrographs, AlL la, 1b, 2a and 4a1; 1931 (Low Flow) and Mean Weather Conditions ...... E-8 E-5 Libby Dam Discharge Temperature Hydrographs, AlL 2a 1931 (Low Flow) Mean Weather ...... E-9 E-6 Libby Dam Discharge Temperature Hydrographs, AlL 4al1931 (Low Flow) Mean Weather ...... E-10 E-7 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Hungry Horse, May 1, 1957 (Below Average Flow) ...... E-ll E-8 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Hungry Horse, August 15, 1957 (Below Average Flow) ...... E-ll E-9 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Hungry Horse, September 30, 1957 (Below Average Flow) ...... E-12 E-lO Predicted Water Temperature Profile Hungry Horse, May 1, 1957 (Average Flow) ...... E-12 E-11 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Hungry Horse, August 15, 1969 (Average Flow) ...... E-13 E-12 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Hungry Horse, September 30, 1969 (Average Flow) ...... E-13 E-13 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Hungry Horse, May 1,1956 (Above Average Flow) ...... E-14 E-14 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Hungry Horse, August 15, 1957 (Above Average Flow) ...... E-14 E-15 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Hungry Horse, September 30, 1969 (Above Average Flow) ...... E-15 E-16 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Libby, May 1, 1981 (Below Average Flow) ...... E-15 E-17 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Libby, August 15, 1981 (Below Average Flow) ...... E-16 E-18 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Libby, September 30, 1981 (Below Average Flow) ...... E-16 E-19 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Libby, May 1, 1957 (Average Flow) ...... E-17 E-20 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Libby, August 15, 1983 (Average Flow) ...... E-17 E-21 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Libby, September 30, 1983 (Average Flow) ...... E-18 E-22 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Libby, May 1, 1984 (Below Average Flow) ...... E-18 E-23 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Libby, August 15, 1984 (Below Average Flow) ...... E-19

1995 FINALEIS xxiii TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Quality Appendix

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Title

E-24 Predicted Water Temperature Profile Libby, September 30, 1983 (Below Average Flow) ...... E-19 G-l Plate 01: Location of Snake River Surveys Reservoir Drawdown Studies ...... G-8 G-2 Plate 02: Correlation Between Discharge and Percent Fines Clearwater River at Spalding, Idaho ...... G-9 G-3 Plate 03: Total Snake River Sediment Deposition (Rm 128 - 148) ...... G-I0 G-4 Plate 04: Total Snake River Sediment Deposition (Rm -.S to 8.0) ...... G-ll G-S Plate OS: 19S9 Clearwater Flows ...... G-12 G-6 Plate 06: Snake River Hydrographs for SOR Year 1974 ...... G-13 G-7 Plate 07: Clearwater River Hydrographs for SOR Year 1974 ...... G-14 G-8 Plate 08: Snake River Hydrographs for SOR Year 19S9 ...... G-IS G-9 Plate 09: Clearwater River Hydrographs for SOR Year 19S9 ...... G-16 G-I0 Plate 10: Snake River Hydrographs for SOR Year 1973 ...... G-17 G-ll Plate 11: Clearwater River Hydrographs for SOR Year 1973 ...... G-18 G-12 Plate 12: Comparison of Drawdown Alternatives (Runs R6) ...... G-19 G-13 Plate 13: Comparison of Drawdown Alternatives (Runs R7) ...... G-20 G-14 Plate 14: Comparison of Drawdown Alternatives (Runs RS) ...... G-21 G-IS Plate IS: Predicted Sediment Transport (with Drawdown) ...... G-22 G-16 Plate 16: Predicted Sediment Deposition (with Drawdown) ...... G-23 G-17 Plate 17: Predicted Sediments Transport (Alt. 7a) ...... G-24 G-18 Plate 18: Predicted Sediments Deposition (Alt. 7a) ...... G-2S G-19 Plate 19: Predicted Sediments Transport (Alt. Sa) ...... G-26 G-20 Plate 20: Predicted Sediments Deposition (Alt. Sa) ...... G-27 G-21 Plate 21: Predicted Sediments Transport (Alt. Sb), First Year ...... , ...... G-28 G-22 Plate 22: Predicted Sediments Deposition (Alt. Sb), First Year ...... G-29 G-23 Plate 23: Predicted Sediments Transport (Alt. Sb), High Flow Sequence, Shielded Case ...... G-30 G-24 Plate 24: Predicted Sediments Deposition (Alt. Sb), High Flow Sequence, Shielded Case ...... G-31 G-2S Plate 2S: Predicted Sediments Transport (Alt. Sb), High Flow Sequence, Unshielded Case ...... G-32 G-26 Plate 26: Comparison of Drawdown Alternatives (Unshielded Case) ...... G-33 G-27 Plate 27: Comparison of Drawdown Alternatives (Shielded Case) ...... G-34 H -1 Processes Controling Pollutant Kinetics as Represented by HECSQ ...... H-ll

xxiv FINAL EIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Figure Title

H-2 Computed Temperature Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-12 H - 3 Computed TDS Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Nearthe End of July, August, and September ...... H-13 H -4 Computed Chloride Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-14 H - 5 Computed Alkalinity Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-15 H -7 Computed Nitrate Nitrogen Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-17 H - 8 Computed Phosphorus Profiles Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-18 H -9 Computed Phytoplankton Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-19 H -10 Computed pH Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-20 H -11 Computed Suspended Solids Profiles In the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-21 H -12 Computed Dissolved Lead Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-22 H -13 Computed Dissolved Zinc Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-23 H -14 Computed Total and Dissolved Zinc Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-24 H -15 Computed Profiles of Total Zinc in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-25 H -16 Computed Profiles of Total Zinc in the Columbia and Snake River for '!\vo Bottom Exchange Rateds (top) and '!\vo Sediment Pore Water Concentrations (bottom) ...... H-26 H -17 Computed Dioxin Tracer Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-27 H -18 Computed DDE Tracer Profiles in the Columbia and Snake River System Near the End of July, August, and September ...... H-28 H -19 Water Temperature Profiles, Dworshak Reservoir June and July 1991 ...... H-34 H -20 Water Temperature Profile, Dworshak Reservoir August 1991 ...... H-35 H-21 Water Temperature Profile, Dworshak Reservoir September 1991 ...... H-36 H-22 Water Temperatures (1984) for Ice Harbor, Priest Rapids and The Dalles Forebays (15' depth) ...... H-37

1995 FINAL EIS xxv TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Quality Appendix

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Title

H-23 Water Temperatures (1985) for Ice Harbor, Priest Rapids and The Dalles ...... H-38 H-24 Water Temperatures (1990) for Lower Monumental, Rock Island, and Bonneville ...... H-39 J-1 Schematic Diagram of HEC-5Q Model of Columbia-Snake River System ...... J-2 J-2 Sediment and Water Quality Model Integration ...... J-7 J-3 Process Controlling Pollutant Kinetics as Represented by HEC-5Q (RMA, 1992) ...... J-9 J-4 Full-Scale Model Data Flow ...... J-11 J-5 Algal concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Brownlee Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-20 J-6 Algal concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Grand Coulee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-20 J-7 Algal Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Low Flow, Year 1 Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-21 J-8 Algal Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1 Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-21 J-9 Algal Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Brownlee, High Flow, Year 1 Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-21 J-10 Exceedence in Year 1 and 2 2.5 mg/I Algae at Lower Granite ...... J-22 J-11 Exceedence in Year 1 and 2 2.5 mg/I Algae at Ice Harbor ...... J-22 J-12 Exceedence in Year 1 and 2 2.5 mg/I Algae at Priest Rapids ...... J-23 J-13 Exceedence in Year 1 and 2 2.5 mg/I Algae at John Day ...... J-23 J-14 5-Year Exceedence for Algae at Lower Granite Dam for Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-24 J-15 5-Year Exceedence for Algae at for Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-24 J-16 5 - Year Exceedence for Algae at for Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-25 J-17 5-Year Exceedence for Algae at for Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-25 J-18 Ammonia Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Grand Coulee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-27 J-19 Ammonia Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-27 J-20 Nitrate Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Grand Coulee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-28 J-22 Phosphate Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Grand Coulee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-29 J-23 Phosphate Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-29

xxvi FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Title

J-24 Exceedence in Year 1 & 2 0.1 mg/I Ammonia at Lower Granite J-30 J - 25 Exceedence in Year 1 & 2 0.1 mg/I Ammonia at Ice Harbor ...... J-30 J - 26 Exceedence in Year 1 & 20.1 mg/I Ammonia at John Day ...... J-30 J - 27 5 - Year Exceedence for Ammonia at Lower Granite Dam for Alternative SOS 5b ... . J-31 J - 28 5 - Year Exceedence for Ammonia at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 5b ...... J-31 J - 29 5 - Year Exceedence for Ammonia at Priest Rapids Dam for Alternative SOS 5b ...... J-32 J - 30 5 - Year Exceedence for Ammonia at John Day Dam for Alternative SOS 5b ...... J-32 J - 31 Correlation Between Snake River Suspended Sediment and Turbidity ...... J-34 J-32 Silt Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-35 J-33 Silt Concentrations (mgll) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 5a ...... J-35 J - 34 Silt Concentrations (mg/I) from BonneviIIe to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-36 J -35 Silt Concentrations (mgll) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 6c ...... J-36 J-36 Silt Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS 5a ...... J-38 J-37 Silt Concentrations (mgll) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-39 J -38 Silt Concentrations (mg/I) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 5, Alternative SOS 5a ...... J-39 J - 39 Exceedence in Year 1 & 2 50 mgll Silt at Lower Granite ...... J-40 J -40 Exceedence in Year 1 & 250 mg/I Silt at Ice Harbor .. ' ...... J-40 J -41 5-Year Exceedence for Silt at Lower Granite Dam for Alternative SOS 5a and SOS 6a J-41 J -42 5 - Year Exceedence for Silt at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 5a ...... J-41 J -43 5 - Year Exceedence for Silt at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 5a ...... J-42 J -44 Total Sediment Accumulations (kg/m2) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-43 J -45 Total Sediment Accumulations (kg/m2) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 5a ...... J-43 J -46 Total Sediment Accumulations (kg/m2) from Bonneville to Grand Coulee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 5b ...... J-44 J -48 Total Sediment Accumulations (kg/m2) from Bonneville to Grand Coulee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS 5b ...... J-45 J -49 Total Sediment Accumulations (kg/m2) from Bonneville to Grand Coulee, Average Flow, Year 5 Alternative SOS 5b ...... J-45

1995 FINALEIS xxvii TABLE OF CONTENTS Water Qua lity Appendix

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Figure Title

J -50 Total Lead Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-47 J -51 Total Lead Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS Sa ...... J-47 J -52 Dissolved Lead Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS Sa ...... J-48 J -53 Total Lead Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-48 J -54 Total Lead Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 6c ...... J-49 J -55 Dissolved Lead Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 6c ...... J-49 J -56 Total Lead Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS Sa ...... J-50 J -57 Total Lead Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-50 J -58 Total Lead Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS 6c ...... J-51 J -59 Exceedence in Year 1 and 2 15 ug/l Total Lead at Lower Granite ...... J-52 J -60 Exceedence in Year 1 and 215 ug/l Total Lead at John Day ...... J-52 J -61 Exceedence in Year 1 and 2 15 ug/l Total Lead at Ice Harbor ...... J-52 J -62 5-Year Exceedence for Total Lead at Lower Granite Dam for Alternative SOS Sa ... . J-53 J -63 5 - Year Exceedence for Total Lead at Lower Granite Dam for Alternative SOS 6a ... . J-53 J-64 5-Year Exceedence for Total Lead at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS Sa J-54 J-65 5-Year Exceedence for Total Lead at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 6a J-54 J-66 5 - Year Exceedence for Total Lead at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 6c J-55 J -67 5-Year Exceedence for Total Lead at Priest Rapids Dam for Alternative SOS 6a .... . J-55 J - 68 5 - Year Exceedence for Total Lead at John Day Dam for Alternative SOS Sa ...... J-56 J -69 5-Year Exceedence for Total Lead at John Day Dam for Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-56 J -70 Total Lead Concentrations (ug/m2) from Bonneville to Grand Coulee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS Sa ...... J-57 J -71 Total Lead Concentrations (ug/m2) from Bonneville to Grand Coulee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS Sa ...... J-57 J -72 DDT Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 2a ...... J-59 J -73 DDT Concentrations (ug/l) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS Sa ...... J-59

xxviii FINAL EIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES - CONT

Figure Title Page

J-74 DDT Concentrations (ugll) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 6a ...... J - 60 J -75 DDT Concentrations (ugll) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 1, Alternative SOS 6c ...... J - 60 J -76 DDT Concentrations (ugll) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS 5a ...... J -61 J -77 DDT Concentrations (ugll) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS 6a ...... J-61 J-78 DDT Concentrations (ugll) from Bonneville to Brownlee, Average Flow, Year 2, Alternative SOS 6c ...... J - 62 J -79 Exceedance in Year 1 and 2 0.0004 ugll DDT at Lower Granite ...... J - 62 J - 80 Exceedance in Year 1 and 2 0.0004 ugll DDT at Ice Harbor...... J - 63 J -81 5-Year Exceedence for DDT at Lower Granite Dam for Alternative SOS 5a ...... J -64 J -82 5-Year Exceedence for DDT at Lower Granite Dam for Alternative SOS 6a ...... J -64 J-83 5 - Year Exceedence for DDT at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 5a J-65 J-84 5-Year Exceedence for DDT at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 6a J-65 J-85 5-Year Exceedence for DDT at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 6c J-66 J -86 5-Year Exceedence for DDT at John Day Dam for Alternative SOS 5a ...... J-66 J - 87 5 - Year Exceedence for Total Lead at Lower Granite Dam for Alternative SOS 5b ... . J-68 J - 88 5 - Year Exceedence for Total Lead at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 5b ...... J-68 J -89 5 - Year Exceedence for DDT at Lower Granite Dam for Alternative SOS 5b ...... J-69 J - 90 5 - Year Exceedence for DDT at Ice Harbor Dam for Alternative SOS 5b ...... J-69 K-1 Snake River Velocity at Clarkston, WA High Flow Year (1974) ...... K-4 K-2 Snake River Velocity at Clarkston, WA Medium Flow Year (1959) ...... K-5 K-3 Snake River Velocity at Clarkston, WA Low Flow Year (1973) ...... K-6 K-4 EBASCO Services Incorporated ...... K-7 K-5 Silt Concentration Profiles from Bonneville Dame to ...... K-8 K - 6 Silt Concentration Profiles from Bonneville Dame to Brownlee Dam ...... K-9 K -7 Silt Concentration Profiles from Bonneville Dame to Brownlee Dam ...... K-10

1995 FINALEIS xxiX/{xxx blank) Water Quality Appendix 1

CHAPTER 1

SCOPE AND PROCESS

1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF WATER QUALITY "Dissolved oxygen levels are adequate in the main ISSUES stem Columbia River but have been depressed in some tributaries by irrigation withdrawal and re­ Because water is the element upon which the river turns, and by waste loads from municipal and indus­ system operates, an assessment of water quality has trial activities. Specific conductance, nitrate-nitrite, very broad implication. Water quality issues for sodium, sulfate, chloride, and temperature in the analysis in the SOR emerged from three sources: main stem generally increase downstream. The 1. written accounts of known water quality Snake and Willamette rivers account for the major problems in the media or scientific literature; input of total nitrogen and phosphorus to the Co­ lumbia River. Suspended sediment tends to increase 2. public comment at SOR scoping and in subbasins with logging and agriculture. Seasonal coordination meetings; turbidity from suspended sediments has declined in the main stem since the mid-1950s because of 3. a survey of federal, state, county, and local impoundments. Toxic chemicals (pesticides, PCBs, agencies in the Columbia River Basin. and trace metals) have been found in fish of the Once defined, these issues were considered at length Columbia River Basin, reSUlting in at least one by regional technical water quality specialists partici­ recent human health advisory". pating in the SOR Water QuaJity Work Group. 1.1.2 Water Quality issues raised by the 1.1.1 Known Historical Water Quality Issues public and agency coordination.

Concern about degradation of water quaJity in the Columbia River Basin began in the 1930s. Hydro­ 1.1.2.1 Public Scoping power development, irrigated agriculture, logging, mining, stream channelization, and urbanization The SOR Interagency 'learn conducted 14 meetings were contributing factors. The following abstract throughout the Pacific Northwest during the summer from a recent paper by Stober and Nakatani pub­ of 1990. During and after these meetings, the public lished in Water Quality in North American River responded in oral testimonies, letters, comment Systems, Battelle Press, 1992 summarizes many of cards, and transcription of small group sessions. The the central issues: following issues, concerns, and ideas are excerpted from the Comment Summary prepared in January "Hydroelectric and agricultural development has 1991 by the SOR Interagency 'learn: changed the quantity and timing of seasonal run­ off. Impoundments have modulated temperature • water quality must be part of SOR (Lake extremes in the main stem, delaying the annual Spokane Association, King Hill Irrigation thermal maximum below Grand Coulee about 30 District, 'ftout Unlimited, U.S. Soil Con­ days. Warm temperature occurs seasonally at the servation Service); mouths of tributaries, which may delay the return of adult salmonids to spawning grounds. High spill at • continued support of water quality programs dams may supersaturate the river water with air and to better educate water users and managers cause gas bubble diseases in fish. (Riverview Grange);

1995 FINALEIS 1-1 1 Water Quality Appendix

• mitigate stream siltation and chemical pollu- • hot water released by Hanford, fertilization, tion; develop an educational program on the accumulation of pesticides, mining, stripping enhancement of water quality in watersheds; forests, and other large sources of point pollution harm salmon; • water quality is important to wildlife; • reservoir drawdown alternatives should • water quality and anadromous fish runs are include flushing rates over the dam under most important concerns; different drawdown and water retention time conditions (Upper Columbia 'fribes); • the biggest eutrophication problem was at Hanford, when hot water was expelled; • water budget and spill plans and other flow regimes have a significant effect on river • industrial and non-industrial pollution must management; be stopped if all of the benefits of the Co- lumbia are to be maintained; • good Clearwater River flows are needed for dispersal of effluent from pulp and paper • the priority must be to keep the river clean; operations: if a conflict develops with main- taining high Dworshak reservoir levels, flows • SOR process needs to include water quality for effluent dispersal should take precedence decisions; (Potlach Corp.); • to prepare for twice as many people in the • exposed sand bars and mud flats, undercut year 2030, a Columbia River Basin Water cliffs, and eroded banks make Lake Roose- Quality Authority must be established to velt dangerous during periods of low water; measure and monitor water quality; turbid water makes the lake dangerous dur- ing high water (Stevens County Assessor); • the water quality of the Columbia River must be maintained and in some cases improved • any redirected waters back to the Columbia (Bureau of Indian Affairs); should be carefully monitored for pollutants as well as temperature, flow changes, or • no more discharges of radioactive wastes diversion techniques; such clean -up would from Hanford and marine effluents; sewage include getting rid of pesticides and herb i- and the like should not be allowed to further cides, phosphate and nitrates, and industrial pollute the waters; wastes, especially dioxins from pulp mills; • system should be managed so as to maintain • stringent habitat, land use, conservation, and enhance water quality and fish and pollution control, and education programs wildlife habitat (University of Montana); should be developed within each watershed to mitigate stream siltation, chemical pollu- Libby dam's selective withdrawal system • tion, and flooding; should be used and the [Kootenai] river be kept at optimal temperature for [resident] • fish and wildlife needs should be built in as fishery improvement (Kootenai Fly Fishers); hard constraints in the long-term plan of operation (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service); • ecosystem alteration is irreversible when egg, fry, and smolt exposure to fungal, bacterial, • consultation with agencies that are mandated and viral pathogens cannot be mitigated by [Montana] state law to administer water because of inadequate water movement, high management programs needs to be part of water temperatures, and changes in water the review (Montana Department of Natural quality; Resources);

1-2 FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix 1

• agriculture and aquaculture returns are 3. Snake River confluence to putting an enormous silt and nutrient load (Columbia) [on the Snake River between Milner and Bliss dams] and the dams have blocked much 4. Snake River of the rivers natural flushing action (Wood River Resource Conservation); 5. Yakima River

• point discharge on the system and Canada is 6. Willamette River still raw sewage;

7. Bonneville Dam to the Pacific Ocean • use of treaty with Canada should also incor­ (Columbia) porate pollution control along the Columbia River (Lake Spokane Protective Associa­ The most important parameters from the list of 50 tion); were ranked from 1 to 20, most to least important. The resulting weighted averages are summarized in • study as to why the algae is taking over the Table 1-1. Responses to the letter survey were very Snake River (King Hill Irrigation District). limited but generally reflected a consensus of water quality specialists representing several agencies. There were additional public comments during the 14 SOR Mid-Point Review Public Meetings held in 1.1.2.3 Water Quality Work Group Scoping the fall of 1992. Sixty-six written testimonies and 136 comment sheets were received from the public. As indicated above, the water quality problems in Issues raised at these meetings included the need to the Columbia River Basin are quite diverse. The maintain high water quality to protect anadromous system operation review explores a range of strate­ fish, and increased water conservation to limit gies based on the manipulation of river flows and wasteful irrigation practices. the water surface elevation in project reservoirs. Dissolved gas saturation, water temperature, and 1.1.2.2 Agency Water Quality Letter Survey of turbidity issues can be addressed, at least partially, Professionals by these strategies. Other water quality problems are either remotely or not at all related to hydropower The water quality work group conducted a limited operations. Information required to make the con­ letter survey of regional government agencies in­ nection between system operations and water quality volved in water quality. Respondents were asked to in those cases may also be unavailable. identify and rank 20 contaminants and physical Water conditions required by various river users parameters from a list of 50. The list included the differ and sometimes conflict. Meeting the needs of following groups: conventional parameters, toxic anadromous fish, for instance, can be at the expense chemicals in water and sediments, semi -volatiles, of resident fish, recreation, navigation, flood control, nutrients, bacteria, and radionuclides. Seven river and power. The design of an alternative satisfying all reaches were considered: these requirements is impossible. Instead of at­ tempting to create a "water quality alternative" the 1. International border to group decided to assess the water quality implica­ (Columbia) tions of alternatives designed to meet other objec­ tives. They also formulated reservoir operating rules 2. Grand Coulee Dam to Snake River conflu­ for improving water quality or preventing its degra­ ence (Columbia) dation.

1995 FINALEIS 1-3 1 Water Quality Appendix

Table 1-1. Top Twenty Water Quality Parameters

< ..... river reaches ..... >

Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3 Reach 4 ReacbS Reach 6 Reach 7 Border to Grand G. Coulee to Snake R. to Snake R. Yakima Willamette Bonneville Coulee Snake Bonneville River to Ocean Riv.conn

1 DIOX/FUR DISSGAS PESTICIDES TEMP TEMP DIOX/FUR DIOX/FUR 2 DISSGAS PESTICIDES DISSGAS TSS PESTICIDES PCB PESTle. 3 Cd Hg DIOX/FUR DISSGAS TURB TEMP PCB 4 Pb TEMP TEMP PESTICIDES DDT PESTICIDES AI 5 Hg Cd Pb TOTPHOSPH TSS Cu TEMP 6 AS DIOX/FUR Hg TURB TOTPHOSPH Pb DDT 7 Zn As As SOLPHOSPH TKN Hg DISSGAS 8 PCB Pb PCB AMMONIA AMMONIA Zn Cd 9 Cu AI VOC DIOX/FUR DISSGAS TOTCOLIFOR Hg 10 PESTICIDES Zn Cd BOD SOLPHOSPH DDT TSS 11 AI Cu TURB TKN BOD CHLOROPHEN BOD 12 Be Se AI DDT FECALCOlT TSS CHLOROP. 13 Cr TURB Cr TOTCOLIFOR Hg TURB Cu 14 Fe Ce-137 Se Ph Ph BOD Cr 15 Ba Ba Cu FECALCOL Pb pH Pb 16 Ni Be Zn TOC TOTCOLIFOR TOTPHOSPH As 17 Ag Cr ADSORORG Hg Cd AI Zn 18 TOTPHOSPH Fe Ba Pb VOC As VOC 19 Se Ni Be Cd Cu Ba TOTCOLIE 20 TEMP Ag Fe VOC Zn Be TURB

Notes: (1) ranking is by order of importance, as perceived by the professional agencies surveyed. 1 is most important; 20, least important;

(2) standard chemistry symbols are used whenever applicable (See Chemistry Symbols in Part 7.0, Glossary of Terms and Acronyms). Other abbreviations/acronyms are as follows in their order of appearance in the table: DIOX/FUR= dioxin/furan, DISSGAS= dissolved gas, TOTPHOSH= total phosphorous ammonia, TEMP= water temperature, TUR= turbidity, ADSORORG = adsorbable organic, TSS = total suspended sediments, TKN = total Kjeldahl nitrogen, SOLPHOSP= soluble reactive phosphorous, BOD= biochemical oxygen de­ mand, TOTCLIFOR - total coliform bacteria, TOC= total organic carbon, VOC= volatile organic com­ pounds, FECALCOL= fecal coliform, CHLOROPHEN = chlorophenol.

1-4 FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix 1

The limited quantity, fragmentary nature, and (4) the areas downstream from Libby and quality of information can also be a serious handicap Hungry Horse Dams were not modeled for in describing and predicting water quality. The most water quality because of a lack of data; and critical deficiency is in data that address interactions (5) daily variations of water quality parameters between water quality problems and river opera­ could not be predicted with the information tions. Additionally complicating the study of Colum­ provided by the hydroregulation model used bia River Basin water quality is the large number of in the System Operation Review. river systems involved. Each of these systems con­ tains major reservoirs with unique characteristics. Because of these limitations, quantitative analysis Analytical tools or models for addressing contami­ was confined to three parameters, dissolved gas nants such as trace metals, radionuclides, and nutri­ saturation, water temperature, and sediments (tur­ ents in this variety of settings need more calibration bidity). Other parameters which affect water quality, data to be reliable. while important to overall environmental quality, were evaluated qualitatively. Sediment-associated Water entering the study area from Canada and the nutrient and contaminant loads due to erosion were upper Snake River basin compounds these problems. assessed quantitatively, but input data was so limited While originating outside the geographical scope of that model results had to be evaluated qualitatively. SOR analysis, the condition of these flows has a They should be reassessed during the next round of cumulative effect on water quality in the lower the SOR after sufficient data has been collected. reaches of the river. Loss of the spring freshet and 1.1.3 Areas of Controversy added flows during other seasons in particular were cited in many ways in which dams have changed There is disagreement about the validity and reliabil­ conditions in the lower Columbia. Although not ity of models used to analyze some water quality described in detail, the impacts of the entire reser­ contaminants. Three major water quality conditions voir system, both in the U.S. and Canada, on the affected by system regulation - -water tempera­ habitat in the lower river were provided in this water ture, dissolved gas saturation, and suspended sedi­ quality appendix. A compilation of papers on im­ ment -- can be modeled with reasonable accuracy. pacts of the hydro system on the lower Columbia Other parameters could only be assessed qualita­ River can also be found in the anadromous fish tively. technical appendix. There are also differences of opinion about water quality in the future. They revolve around predic­ These limitations were also identified: tions about future legislation (re-authorization of the Clean Water Act) and advances in pollution (1) only the broad, basinwide picture on the main control techniques and irrigation practices. stem Columbia/Snake Rivers was assessed, 1.2 DEVELOPMENT PROCESS OF WATER exclusive of any other tributaries; QUALITY APPENDIX Preparation of the Water Quality Appendix is a (2) very little information is available linking cooperative effort between the three lead agencies contamination from point source pollutants for SOR and other agencies and organizations with such as pulp and paper plants and nuclear representatives on the water quality work group (see reactors to main stem water quality; List of Preparers). The appendix is intended to provide an accurate picture of water quality condi­ (3) groundwater quality conditions and their tions under existing conditions and those which relation to system operations could not be would be produced by the implementation of a range predicted; of alternatives.

1995 FINALEIS 1-5 1 Water Quality Appendix

Interagency staff members performed the multitude Station, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service were of analyses needed to evaluate the relative merits of occasional participants. the proposed alternatives. They were guided by Many other state agencies and private citizens have suggestions and assessments by the general member­ asked to be included on the mailing list for minutes ship of the work group and other interested parties. of meetings and other documents. This includes Outside contractors were also retained to assist with Oregon, Idaho, and Montana water quality special­ specific analysis and report writing. ists; coordinators of the Lower Columbia River Water quality work group members have demon­ Bi-State Program; and Corps of Engineers research strated knowledge and experience that encompassed institutions (Hydrologic Engineering Center, Davis, many aspects of water quality. They started meeting CA and Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, about once a month since mid-1991, and undertook MS). numerous research and writing assignments. 1.2.2 Coordination with Other Work Groups 1.2.1 Development of the Work Group Since water is central to virtually every other re­ source involved in the SOR, close coordination with Interagency staff members were nominated by other work groups was essential. The water quality agency heads on the basis of current responsibilities group routinely coordinated its activities with the in the field of water quality. Other work group anadromous fish, resident fish, irrigation, navigation, members were invited after referrals disclosed cultural resources, recreation, hydropower, and interest in and knowledge about water quality. This wildlife work groups. Input for and results from included people associated with universities, private water quality models had to be available and consis­ citizen groups, Indian tribes, and federal and state tent with information sought and generated by these agencies. Representatives of the following agencies other work groups. and groups were regular and continuing participants: Examples of information exchanges included impacts • u.s. Corps of Engineers on water quality from irrigation return flows, data • U.S. Bureau of Reclamation regarding ship movement, effects of water tempera­ ture, dissolved gas saturation, and turbidity on • Bonneville Power Administration anadromous and resident fish, effects of sediment build-up and river bank erosion on cultural sites, U.S. Geological Survey • and information about water transparency and purity • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for recreation. • National Marine Fisheries Services A joint meeting was held with the anadromous and resident fish work groups to determine the nature • U.S. Soil Conservation Service and extent of their water quality objectives. Meet­ ings with the anadromous fish group were also held Lake Roosevelt Water Quality Council • to coordinate methodologies for predicting dissolved • Citizen For a Clean Columbia gas saturation. • Oregon Department of Environmental Regulated flow data for each SOR alternative were Quality obtained from the river simulation work group and the economics group provided methods for assessing Representatives from Portland State University water quality benefits. There was a continuous (Civil Engineering Department), Environment exchange of information about the content, format, Canada, Department of Community and style of this document with National Environ­ Development, the Corps of Engineer's Hydrologic mental Policy Act guidance group. Sustained liaison Engineering Center and Waterways Experiment was maintained between project managers and work

1-6 FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix 1

groups on budgeting, scheduling, and overall coor­ Full-scale analysis was a more detailed evaluation dination. using state-of-the-art modeling to rate the rela­ tive merits of the various alternatives and rank them 1.3 SCREENING ANALYSIS in terms of effects on water quality. The perfor­ mance of each alternative was assessed both quanti­ More than 90 alternatives were initially developed tatively and qualitatively based on predicted water by SOR work groups to address a full range of temperature, dissolved gas saturation, and, when system operation possibilities. Some were extreme, applicable, sediment transport. providing for a single interest at the expense of other considerations. Others attempted to achieve The results of the water quality evaluation were some compromises to accommodate a number of combined with the results of other SOR other work resources. groups and composite ratings were calculated for use Screening analysis was a rough, first-cut assessment in the selection of the recommended alternative(s). to eliminate extreme alternatives from further consideration. Screening permits the grouping 1.5 FULL-SCALE ANALYSIS similar alternatives for full-scale analysis. To comply with the National Environmental Policy 1.4 SELECTION OF ALTERNATIVES Act, full-scale assessment of all environmental Initial screening was useful in establishing how the effects associated with the implementation of each system would respond to operations optimizing alternative was required. This included a "systemat­ conditions for single resources. It helped identify ic, interdisciplinary approach which will ensure the alternatives that could solve specific problems, but integrated use of the natural and social sciences and would also negatively affect too many other water the environmental design arts in planning and in users. decision-making". Environmental indices were developed to characterize the relative significance of Public comment on the results of screening analysis the predicted impacts. was then solicited at a series of meetings. The most promising alternatives in terms of predicted impacts Three different mathematical models were used to on and potential acceptance by all water users were predict how each strategy would affect water retained for a more complete, full-scale analysis. temperature, dissolved gas saturation, sediment Many were combined with other variations to form transport, and other water quality parameters. This alternatives with broader but generally compatible process is described in detail in Chapters 3 and 4 of goals and objectives. this document.

1995 FINALEIS 1-7/(1-8 blank) Water Quality Appendix 2

CHAPTER 2

WATER QUALITY IN THE COLUMBIA RIVER BASIN TODAY

2.1 INTRODUCTION water column, potentially affecting turbidity and concentrations of contaminants in the reservoir or The Columbia River watershed encompasses a downstream. Sediment transport downstream of 259,OOO-square-mile area shared by two nations dams is affected because natural river processes and six States (Figure 2-1). The river begins in replace the suspended sediment that was removed by , Canada and flows through the the upstream dams. states of Washington, Idaho, and Oregon to the Pacific Ocean. Its major tributaries are the Koote­ Water released over spillways and heating (solar and nay, Pend OreiUe, Spokane, Snake, Yakima, Des­ geological) can also increase gas levels which can chutes, and Willamette. cause gas bubble disease in fish. Gas bubble disease can kill fish and may cause behavioral disorders. Other states and provinces located in the watershed Fish tolerance to elevated gas pressure varies with are Alberta, Canada, Wyoming and Montana. There fish species, life history stage, water temperature, are several small and large rivers that enter into hardness, depth, and length of exposure. these tributaries. Each state has its own water Water temperature is also affected by dams. After a quality standards, and management and monitoring stream is impounded, more of its water surface area programs. The waterways within the watershed are becomes exposed to solar radiation, precipitations, also regulated by several federal, state, tribal, and evaporation, and wind effects. At the microclimatic local agencies, each having responsibilities for water level and depending on local conditions and mesos­ rights, allocation, flows, and operation of the system. cale meteorological elements, new lakes may have Compared with other regions in the nation, water in some influence over weather and climate. Creation the Columbia River Basin is still relatively clean. of large deep reservoirs normally causes stratifica­ Concern about the permanence of this advantage, tion or layers of water with different physical and however, has been growing. Population growth, chemical properties. Dams can radically change the mining, logging, agriculture, and industry have temperature and gas pressure of the water released created and are continuing to create significant downstream, impacting the aquatic ecosystem. problems. Columbia River dams have been Flow releases from reservoirs are regulated by a associated with the production or exacerbation of series of operating rule curves designed to ensure chemical, physical, and thermal pollution. that the dams perform their authorized functions. Actual releases, however, depend on run-off condi­ 2.2 ACTIVITIES AFFECTING WATER QUALITY tions. Generally, more water is stored and released Dams and Hydropower during a high flow year than during a low flow year, resulting in different impacts on water quality in The major purpose of dam construction on the reservoirs and areas downstream from the dams. Columbia was to prevent flooding and produce More flows also means higher potential for spill. As electricity. In most cases, irrigation, navigation, and most of the Columbia and Snake River is now a recreation were secondary benefits. Dams impound series of stair-step impoundments (see Figure 2-2), water and can sharply reduce river velocity. As a the water moving downstream does not circulate result, sediment will either settle on the bottom of sufficiently to rid itself of gas entrainment at the the reservoir or remain suspended in the reservoir's upstream dams. As a result, dissolved gas supersatu-

1995 FINALEIS 2-1 2 Water Quality Appendix

ration created by spill at one dam will often stay at ingly, sufficient water was spilled to keep the fish or above that initial saturation level as the water away from the turbines and to guarantee at least a flows toward the ocean. 90 percent fish passage survival rate at each dam. Other performance criteria such as Fish Passage Efficiency (percent of fish passing a dam through a Dam operational measures could result in down­ route other than the turbines) have also been used. stream scouring, increased gas supersaturation, decreased dissolved oxygen in deeper water, in­ In 1989, a Fish Spill memorandum of agreement creased turbidity, and resuspension of contaminated was signed between Bonneville Power Administra­ fine sediments. Upstream impacts may include tion and several state, federal, and Indian 1fibes decreased water volumes and flows, increased tem­ fishery agencies specifying more finite spill percent­ peratures, decreased dissolved oxygen concentra­ ages of the outflows at Lower Monumental, Ice tions, increased pollutant concentrations, and al­ Harbor, John Day and The Dalles Dams. These tered mixing of outfall discharges. These effects percentages, expressed in percent of daily average could result in violations of water quality standards. project outflows, were respectively 70, 25, 0, and 10 percent for the spring (April-May); and 70, 25, 20, Fisheries and 5 percent for the summer (June-August). At Bonneville Dam, the Corps of Engineers spilled Development of the dams and hydroelectric projects nightly 53 percent of the project outflow in the on the Columbia and Snake rivers has altered natu­ spring, and 41.5 percent of the project outflow in the ral flows in those streams. Part of the natural spring summer. run -off which juvenile salmon and steelhead relied on to make their outmigration to the ocean is now Although spill for-fish-passage has been discontin­ stored in reservoirs for use in drier parts of the year. ued at , following comple­ To speed up fish travel time, the Northwest Power tion of permanent fish bypass facilities at that proj­ Planning Council established a water budget, a ect in 1992, it is likely to continue at other projects volume of water set aside for fish. It is released from for some time. In the mid-Columbia River reach upriver storage dams during the spring run (April 15 between Wells and Priest Rapids Dams, the mid­ - June 15) to create an artificial freshet. Columbia Public Utility District (PUD) dams contin­ ue spilling the amount required in their FERC The original water budget amounted to a total of licenses during June-August. This varies from about 4.03 million acre-feet -- 2.39 million acre-feet at 2 to 20 percent of daily average project outflow. Priest Rapids Dam and 1.64 million acre-feet at Lower Granite Dam. Since its inception in late 1982, the water budget has been increased several times. Agriculture In 1993, the water budget provided by Dworshak Reservoir for the Lower Snake River was about 1.1 Approximately seven million acres of farmlands were million acre-feet, and the water budget provided by irrigated in the Columbia River Basin in 1990 (Co­ the upper Columbia River reservoirs was about 6.45 lumbia Basin Project Expansion Draft EIS, USBR). million acre-feet. Release of this water augments This included 3.3 million acres in Idaho, 0.4 in flows in the main stem Columbia and Snake Rivers, Montana, 1.9 in Washington, and 1.3 in Oregon. and generally benefits water quality as well. These figures were expected to remain fairly steady over the next 30 years. Water diverted for irrigation To reduce fish mortality at dams located along the evaporates or transpires, seeps into the ground, or juvenile migration routes, the Council's original Fish runs off the end of fields, eventually returning to the and Wildlife Program also called for an interim river or tributaries as a point or non-point source measure known as "spill for-fish-passage". Accord- of pollution.

2-2 FINALEIS 1995 Wal~r Quality Appendix. 2

The:Columbia .: -:;.j r- River"sin

., -, . ,. "" ...,-,...' -.. " ,-- !

"'!"'~ -, , f - ~" . , ~ '" ' ~ -'-

"~' t

J' _~"" ,., , \

..--.

Figure 2-1. The Columbia River Basin

1995 FlNALE1S 2-3 j 2 Water Quality Appendix

Irrigation return flows may elevate water tempera­ Most are small spills of gasoline, diesel, or oil but tures, increase suspended sediments, and contain the cumulative effect on the river's ecology may be fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and natural salts significant. Larger, more serious spills require leached from the soil. Irrigation return flows are notification of the proper authorities and immediate frequently wann and polluted and can enter rivers, clea n- up measures. Because of the size and velocity lakes, and groundwater supplies. High concentra­ of the river, containment is very difficult. Depending tions of phosphorous and nitrogen may cause small on the type of material spilled and the location, lakes to choke with aquatic weeds and algae. Dead sections of the river could be affected for many pJanlS sink to the bottom where they are broken years. down by bacteria, a biochemical process which Mining consumes dissolved oxygen. Mining has occurred extensively in Columbia River Livestock grazing adjacent to rivers and streams can Basin. It has diminished significantly in recent years have a significant impact on stream water quality. because of economic conditions and new environ­ Poor grazing management practices destroy riparian mental regulations. habitat adjacent to streams and other vegetation necessary to prevent erosion. Heavily grazed wa­ The environmental effects of mining can be both tersheds usually exhibit less holding capacity; higher long and short tenn. Erosion from soil disturbance than nonnal spring run-off causes increased veloci· creates sedimentation in rivers and streams. Some ties and sedimentation. Streams that would nonnally mining operations divert water from streams for run year-round can berome dry or intermittent as a various purposes; return flows can be polluted with result. toxins and heavy metals. Separation of minerals sometimes requires the use of chemicals and metals Navigation and Transportation hannful to aquatic systems. lransportation on the Columbia River has been vital Mining in streams can also disturb stream bottoms to the eronomy of the area. Wheat growers and and shoreline vegetation. Mines that have been many industries along the river depend on it to closed for years can continue to affect streams when transport their products to market. Many large precipitation passes through mine tailings or cavities vessels and barges travel up and down the river daily in the tailings created during mine operation. A requiring channels deep enough for them to navi­ restored water table can cause contaminated ground­ gate. Most of this traffic is between Portland, Ore­ water to resurge into nearby streams. gon and Lewiston, Idaho where sufficient navigation TImber lmd Wood Product Industry draft has been maintained and dams are equipped with adequate navigation locks. The timber industry, extremely important to the Dredging to maintain navigation channels, mostly economy of this region, has been under close scruti­ between the mouth of the Columbia River and ny in recent years because of impacts to watersheds J, Portland, affects the hydrology of the river channel and fish and wildlife habitat. The wood product • and disturbs the channel boltom. It can also increase industry has also been criticized because of contami­ the velocity of the current and the movement of nated by-products and chemicals produced and J suspended sediments, which can scour the bottom discharged into the rivers and streams. and shoreline. Disruption of the river channel can be I Numerous pulp and paper mills are located in the detrimental to the riverine ecological balance. Columbia River Basin. The standard process often Dredging also disturbs sediments containing toxic requires chlorine bleach. By-products of this pro­ • substances that can be harmful to plants and ani­ cess include dioxin and furans which are known mals. carcinogens. Dioxin and furans have a long half life, The possibility of accidental spills from barges, other which means they can remain in a riverine environ· vessels, and trains running parallel to the river exists. ment for several years.

2-4 FINALEIS 1995 S-l: Sm7VNI:l ,661

." ..0' Elevation in feet above sea level c ...

~c: (J)(J) :ron :IE 0 -, :::l -C Ul 3 :02: <' I» W ~ ..... ' Wanapum

596.6 Grand Coulee

.... U!o o o

Canada 745.0

X?P".ddV ,{J!/V,,~ i"DM ~ 2 Waler Quality Apptndix

New technology minimizes the emission of dioxin water quality standards, and section 404 required and furans, and new laws and regulation aTe requir­ National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ing pulp mills to use it. Other by-products harmful (NPOES) permits and a monitoring program for to the environment are still being discharged into each entity that discharged wastewater from a point the river. These include other o rganic chlorides, source into navigable streams. When the FWPCA acids and bases, fibre and resins. was amended in 19n, Sections 307 and 402 required pre-treatment of pollutants which pass through or Several harmful chemicals are used to produce interfere with municipal treatment systems and those plywood and pressed wood. If these chemicals aTe which may contaminate sewerage sludge. not properly treated and disposed of they can pol­ lute the river. There are a few examples of streams Septic Sewage Systems - Septic systems located and reservoirs being damaged by dumping from adjacent or near rivers and streams can be a source pulpmills and other factories. Lower summer water of nutrient, and bacteria loading. Septic systems are levels, by reducing the assimilative capacity of the normally regulated by county ordinances. It is not streams, may make matters even wo rse. known how many septic systems contribute to the pollution of the river's watershed, but their cumula­ Harm to watersheds from logging and associated tive effect could be significant. road construction in the Northwest is well docu­ mented. Logging impacts streams and rivers by Stonnwater run-off -The Environmental Protec­ increasing erosion, temperature, and altering stream tion Agency has recently determined that stormwa­ morphology. New logging techniques and recognition ler run-off from industry and municipalities is a of the detrimental effects of past logging practices major contributor to the pollution. Regulations have are reducing these effects to some extent. Neverthe­ been adopted that require industry and cities to less, logging is still a major factor in the degradation minimize and, if necessary, treat stormwater before of water quality in the Columbia River Basin. it enters rivers, lakes, and streams.

Other Induslries Urban Development Other industries that may affect the basin's water Urban development has increased over the past 50 quality indirecUy or directly are aluminum, food years, spreading over thousands of acres of wetlands processing, and nuclear JX>wer. The aluminum and affecting the natural geology. Wetlands are not industry is a major employer in the Pacific Northwest only valuable habitat for a variety of fish and wildlife, and requires very large amounts of electrical power. but also act as natural sinks collecting, filtering and With the closure of the 1tojan plant, nuclear power biodegrading organic detritus. Each town, city, is a relatively smal l source of energy at the present home, and business located in the basin may affect time but could be more significant in the future if the river's water quality depending on its location safety concerns can be satisfactorily addressed. and type of treatment systems.

Sewage Treatment plants - Before the Federal When industries are located near or adjacent to the Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) Amendments river or its tributaries, industrial discharges can affect of 1972, the wastes discharged into the river by cities water quality depending o n the type and level of and towns were not monitored as closely as they are treatment. For exampl e, large nuclear power plants today. Although the majority of the cities and towns require large amounts of water for the cooling process. treated their discharged wastes, some organic com­ If this water is released into the river at higher than pounds and inorganic chemicals were still entering normal temperatures it could adversely affect the streams. After Congress passed the Oean Water Act, ecosystem. Accidental spills of radioactive material section 303 required the states to develop instream could also adversely affect the river's water quality.

FlNALEIS 1995 Wafer Qllality Appendix 2

PCBs in Waler and Sediments breakers. For example, at Bonneville Dam, the last 12 oil circuit breaker bushings which might oontain Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) are pari of a sma ll amounts of PCBs are scheduled to be replaced group of synt hetic organic chemicals known as by the end of 1995. There are no PCB capacitors in chlorinated hydrocarbons. From 192910 1977, use at the dam. No PCB or PCB-oontaminated PCB-containing products were manufactured in equipment is in service at McNary Dam, nor at any large quantities because of their stability, and of the Corps' Snake River dams. flame-retardant and heat-transfer properties. They Due to historical practices associated with their llse, were and still are widely used in motors, electrical PCBs may have leaked or spilled into the so il or equipment, electromagnets, pumps, cutting oils and been transported into bodies of water. They can be some household appliances. expected in Columbia mainstem reservoirs because of contributions from tributaries and discharges from The properties which made PCBs attractive for use industrial sources, wastewater treatment plants and also made them an environmental and heahh liabil­ landfi ll leachates. ity. They are persistent, can concentrate their toxic­ ity in the food chain, and are widespread, occurring Monitoring of sediment, fish tissues and water everywhere in the world. PCBs accumu late at an during the Oregon-Washington Bi -State Study average level of 2.3 ppm in human fatty tissue and detected PCBs in several locations below cities in an average of 1.2 ppm in human breast milk. the study area, in rivers, ports and in the Columbia River estuary. Other monitoring programs, such as PCBS are stringently regulated under the Toxic those associated with Lake Roosevelt and the C0- Substances Control Act (TSCA) with strict labeling lumbia River Integrated Environmental Monitoring and disposal requirements. Since the TSC~s passage Program (CRIEMP), detected PCBs and other in 1976, the nation's industries have been phasing persistent industrial pollutants in the bottom sedi­ Ollt existing PCBs. These efforts have concentrated ment of the Columbia on both sides of the interstate on removing high level PCBs in the dielectric fluids border. Additional monitoring is needed throughout of electrical transfonners and capacitors. and in the basin to delineate hot spots and conduct risk industrial machinery. Because transformers and as.~e ss m e nt s. These sediment quality data should be capacitors tend to fail catastrophically, TSCA re­ entered into the National Inventory of Contami­ quires soil around a high level PCB spill to be re­ nated Sediment Si tes and Sources, managed by the moved for disposal as a hazardous waste. Many EPA Office of Science and Thchnology. Associated pieces of totally enclosed PCB-containing equip­ fish contamination data should be entered into the ment such as household or industriaVcommercial same national data base. appliances still remain in service. Others have been buried in landfills. EPA's Virtual Removal program is Under extreme river operations scenarios. there may intended to remove PCBs completely from service be a risk of resuspension of sediment laden with before they can escape to the environment. In the PCBs, metals, pesticides if contaminated areas are long term , this effort should prove less costly than disturbed. Most of the anticipated effects will fall treatment of contaminated areas that would result within a range associated with current operations. from future leakage of this equipment. However, the timing and duration of these effects may vary or be displaced seasonally due to changes During the last decade, the Corps of Engineers in spill programs. The general lack of data on loca­ conducted an aggressive PCB removal and replace­ tion and distribution of toxic substances such as ment program to elim inate the risk of PCB releases PCBs does not allow accu rate prediction of health at its dams on the Columbia and Snake Rivers . All effects or changes to chemical quality of the water. of the transformers at these dams are now classified This must be remedied through a long tenn co llabo­ and labeled as non-PCB, as are the oil circuit rative monitoring effort for these substances. During

1995 FINALEIS 2-7 2 Water Quality Appendix

the May 1992 drawdown test in Lower Granite pool, • program eff'ectil·eness samples taken contained no PCBs. compliance • public information and education 2.3 RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES AND GROUPS eva luation of measures and projects.

2.3.1 Federal, State, and Local Agencies An example of comprehensive multi-agency basin­ wide monitoring directly related to the operation of The major federal agencies authorized to operate the Columbia River system is the Columbia and the dams and control the river for power and flood Snake Rivers Dissolved Gas Monitoring Program. control are the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and This Program, in operation since the mid-I97Os at the Bureau of Reclamation. The Bonneville Power Corps projects, was expanded to cover other non­ Administration works closely with these two agencies, Corps dams in 1984. The network currently consists with authorization to market and distribute the power of 33 automated stations located in the forebay and generate at federal Columbia River Basin dams. tailwater areas of most mainstem dams, with satellite linkage between the various measurement sites and Other federal agencies responsible for land use the ground receive stations in Boise, Idaho and activities and recreation on the river are the Nation­ Portland, Oregon (Figure 2 - 3). lis objective is al Park Service (NPS), Bureau of Land Management two-fold: I) to provide the water quality data (BLM). U.S. Fish and Wildlife SelVice (USFWS). needed to adjust spill at Columbia and Snake River and U.S. Forest Service (USFS). The federal agency mainstem dams; and 2) to check for compliance with responsible for water quality within the river basin is existing state water quality standards. the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Agency responsibilities often overlap, requiring close Uncompensated total dissolved gas (TOG) satura­ coordination to protect the resource. tion, which can cause lethal gas bubble disease in fish, is the primary water quality parameter moni­ There are several state, county, tribal, and local tored by agencies operating the Columbia River government agencies also responsible for the various dams. Water temperature is also monitored because activities on the river. The responsibility for water of its critical impact on fish and aquatic life. To quality and associated land use practices, in most relate these two parameters to project operations, cases, nows from Federal to State, and State to data on the spill itself are also routinely collected. county and local government. As such, the dissolved gas monitoring program is very much an integral part of water management. Numerous efforts in the Basin include monitoring activities. These activities cover an array from water Daily monitoring of dissolved gas saturation and I column chemistry to riparian condition to watershed water temperature is carried out during the juvenile land uses to fish surveys and even 10 some macro­ fish migration season, April through October. Major invertebrate surveys. Major monitoring objectives of participants include the Corps of Engineers (COE), • water quality monitoring in EPA and State water U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and the mid­ quality programs are: Columbia County PUDs (Chelan, Douglas and • comprehensive status and trends Grant). During high run-off years, emphasis is problem identification/trends usually on TOO saturation and spill. During low run-off years, Ole emphasis shifls to water tempera­ emerging problem characterization ture and powerhouse releases. The IDO data are • watershed assessments maintained in the Corps North Pacific Division's urveillance/screening Water Quality Data Base and are widely dissemi­ regulatory decision making nated to project owners and other agencies through water quality-based control development the Columbia River Operational HydroMel System investigation of cause-effect relationships (CROHMS).

2-6 FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix 2

2.3.2 Citizen Involvement Organizations and Northwest Rivers Council: An organization de­ Programs signed to protect the natural values of rivers in Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana. Has been In addition to government agencies, many citizen instrumental in establishing the Oregon Rivers involvement groups are active in promoting, manag­ Council and Idaho Rivers United. Main focus is ing or implementing water quality programs in the water quantity. Major activities include sponsorship Columbia Basin. Some of these groups are indicated of an annual conference advocacy. citizen involve­ below, a list that is not exhaustive. ment in policy groups and provision of technical information. Washington Idaho State-wide organizations include Citizen Lake Idaho Water Resources Research Institute manages Monitoring Project (Washington Department of the streamwalk program for Idaho. Also, is involved Ecology), Washington State University Cooperative in citizen education and training programs which Extension Water Quality program, and the Washing­ include Streamkeeper and Project WET. ton State Lake Protection Association. More local­ ized organizations and programs are listed below: Idaho Department of Fish and Game manages a public involvement program designed to protect and Adopt a Stream Foundation: A citizen training restore fish habitat. Also very involved in water program under which people "adopt" a watershed. quality education. Participants are trained to assess the watershed, monitor the conditions, and take local action based Idaho Rivers United: An advocacy organization on their findings. which a1so has a citizen monitoring program. Spon­ sors student monitoring program. Citizens for Clean Columbia: Based in Colville, an advocacy organization involved in the Lake Roose­ Kootenai Environmental Alliance: Located in velt Forum. Provides education programs. Northern Idaho, organization has advocacy role as well as monitoring activities. Interested in policy Clark County Water Resources Council: Advocacy development within the community. group dedicated to encouraging people to monitor, North Idaho Lakes Coalition: A coalition of lake improve and advocate for water quality resources. associations. Major activities include advocacy and Activities include streamwalk, stream stewardship, monitoring the water quality in northern Idaho lake monitoring. and storm-drain monitoring. lakes. Oark County Cooperative Extension: Stream watch Northwest Water Watch: Patterned after the WSU program under which trained volunteers assist in Cooperative Extension Bay Watches Program. trains educational and o rganization programs related to citizens and teachers in all aspects of water ecology. the dynamics of stream water quality. Trained volunteers volunteer 50 hours to work on a water related environmental issue. Environmental Information Center: Provides in­ formation to citizen groups and students. Also Sawtooth Workshop: Trains the public, teachers and sponsors streamwalks and other monitoring activi­ agency staff how to gather and use environmental ties. A program of the Clark County Public Utili­ information. Course is designed to empower partici­ ties. pants to understand issues and take action.

Lake Roosevelt: Lake Roosevelt Water Quali ty Students on the Snake: A student monitoring Council will be developing a citizen monitoring program which sponsors five high school programs program. along the Snake River from Lewiston down.

1995 F1NALE1S 2-9 ___ -----CANADA .... _- U.S.A. .. N WASHINGTON IDAHO

1fAII SfN 2 tOO - DIll S1N2104 ..U UI ,.. STN2007

OREGON

1994 ~ Current Dissolved Gas ..,'"- 10 _ SlN <03 Monitoring Network s:: 4020 0 40 so .. -IW "0.0 ~ APPROXIWITE SCAlE IN MR.ES :§.., ..... '" """- i5l Figure 2-3. 1994 - Location of Dissolved Gas Monitoring Stations S; 0 Water Qualil)l Appendix 2

Oregon 2.4 LAW, REGULATIONS, AND PROGRAMS RELATED TO WATER QUALITY Citizen Lake Monitoring: A state sponsored pro· gram which is managed by Portland State University. Clean Water Act (CWA) Involves and trains citizens in lake monitoring. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, better knOYffl as the Clean Water Act (CWA), is rooted in Governors Watershed Enhancement Board: A older water pollution control legislation such as the statewide grant program which provides funding to Refuse Act (1899) and the Water Pollution Control citizen groups and others to improve or protect Act (1948). Its objective is "to restore and maintain watersheds. the chemical, physical and biological integrity of the River Network: A national organization, based in Nation's waters" and two goals were specified. The Portland, which provides assistance to citizens first is to attain a level of water quality which "pro· concerned about rivers. Has a data base of informa· vides for the protection and propagation of fish, tion on technical assistance, a newsletter, and docu· shellfish, and wildlife and provides for recreation in mentation of successful restoration projects. and on the water." The second is to minimize the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters. FAUNA (Friends and Advocates of Urban Natural CWA Watu Quality Standards. The 1972 amend· Areas): An umbrella organization to provide assis· ments (Section 303c) require the states to establish tance and support to local citizen groups in the water quality standards for all water protected by the greater Portland area. Sponsors forums and confer· CWA. Renewable every three years, these stan· enees to train and inform citizens. dards identify the uses of each water body and water Metropolitan Greenspaces Program: Provides a quality criteria which must be met to protect the regional approach in protecting natural resources in designated (beneficial) use or uses. Section 30Sb the four county area surrounding Portland area. imposes reporting requirements. Each state must Created the greenway corridors for animals, plants submit biennial reports to the EPA assessing the and people. extent to which its waters support beneficial uses, identifying point and non-point sources of poilu. NW Environmental Advocates: An advocacy orga· lion, and recommendi ng actions to improve water nization based in Portland. Provides boat rides to quality. educate concerned citizens about the Columbia and CWA Non-point Source Management Plans. The Willamelte. Recently published two maps, under CWA mandates several broad water quality planning their River Watch program, entiUed: 1bxic Waters, programs to reduce the pollution of surface waters. and Columbia River--lToubled Waters. Section 319 addresses pollution from diffuse sources such as agriculture (excluding irrigation return Oregon Rivers Council: An advocacy organization nows). mining, forest practices, construction, urban working to affect national policy on the protection run-off, ground water seepage, and hydrologic and restoration of rivers. Involved with other north· modifications (such as dams and reservoirs). west states on hydro intervention issues. Each state prepares a non-point management plan Urban Streams Council: A new organization consist· for submittal to the EPA. It includes information ing of FAUNS, Greenspaces, and the multitude of similar to that in the JOSb water quality report but is groups monitoring local streams and rivers. Focus is delves more deeply into non-point source issues. on the Thalatin and WaJlamette Rivers. Non-point sources of pollution are generally ad· Saturday Academy: An educational program that dressed with Best Management Practices (BMPs). includes a National Science Foundation program to These are physical, structural, or managerial practic.­ monitor the Thalatin River. es that prevent or reduce surface and ground water

1995 FINALE1S 2-11 2 WQ(~r Qualily Appendix

pollution. Examples of water quality BMPs aTe: tities. Both the CWA and the Oil Pollution Act of bio-filtration strips, swales, stream fencing. deten­ 1990 use the same implementing regulations. tion and infiltration techniques, oiVwater separators, and waste abatement programs. Monitoring is Safe Drinking Water Act conducted by a variety of agencies to assess the This legislation protects public water supplies includ­ implementation and effectiveness of these manage­ ing groundwater aquifers which draw from surface ment practices. waters.

CWA Point Source Discharge Pennits. The discharge National Environmental Policy Act or 1970 (NEPA) of pollutants from point sources into waters of the U.S. wilhout a permit is prohibited by the CWA. This legislation requires the Federal government to Points sources are usually municipal and industrial undertake activities in a manner which protects the wastewaters, non -contact cooling waters, storm environment. When "significant" environmental waters discharged into water from outfall pipes or effects can be expected to be produced by an activ­ ditches, or combined sewer overf1ows. ity, an environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared. The definition of "significant" is care­ Under Section 402 of the CWA, National Pollutant fully defined. NEPA is intended to be used as a Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits are decision - making tool by Federal agencies. issued by either the EPA or states to which it has Alternatives for achieving the proposed action are delegated the authority. Many states also issue developed in the environmental impact statement permits for waste discharges not covered by the and the effects of implementing each alternative are NPDES program. assessed. A detailed description of National Envi­ ronmental Policy Act requirements is given in the Discharge permits specify effluent limitations which environmental impact statement for Columbia River must be monitored and the types of data which must be reported. Instream as well as wastewater or sto rm System Operations. water monitoring may be required. There are Rivers and Harbors Act or 1899 approximately 1.500 NPDES permits in the Idaho, Oregon, and Washington portions of the Columbia This legislation focuses exclusively on navigable Basin. waters. Section 9 regulates the construction of bridges. causeways. dams or dikes. Section 10 ad­ Dredged or fill materials discharged into water are dresses the obstruction of navigable waters by regulated by Section 404 of the CWA. Discharges wharves, piers, excavations and ftlls. The U.S Army now also include those incidental to excavation Corps of Engineers issues most authorizations. many activities. Most permits for this activity are issued by of which are nationwide general permits. Section 10 the U.S Army Corps of Engineers but the EPA plays permits that involve discharge (intended or inciden­ an active role in evaluating these impacts and may tal) must be certified under Section 401 of the CWA inspect 404 permits in emergency situations. Appli­ by the appropriate State agencies. cants for 404 permits must also provide certification The U.S. Coast Guard, part of the Department of from the appropriate State agencies that the project Transportation, is responsible for some permits will not violate State water quality standards. under the Rivers and Harbors Act. Bridges over CWA Oil Spill Prevention. The CWA (Sections 311 navigable waters are an example of Coast Guard and 308) controls the discharge of oil into or upon permit. waters of the U.S., adjoining shorelines or contigu­ Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) ous zones. Certain facilities must have Spill PreVen­ tion Conlrol and Countermeasure (SPCC) plans if a This statute created a voluntary program to protect spill could enter waters of the U.S. in harmful quan- coastal resources, including the Great Lakes. 1b

2-12 F1NALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix 2

receive Federal funding. states must develop pro­ agency exercising administration over wildlife of that grams for regulating land and water uses associated state. with coastal development. These enforceable policies Executive Order 12088 (Federal Compliance with must also include measures for resolving conflicts Pollution Control Standards,1978) among competing uses. Both Oregon and Washing­ ton have Federally approved Coastal Zone Manage­ This presidential order delegates to the head of each ment Programs. The Act was amended and re-au­ agency the responsibility for ensuring that all neces­ thorized in 1990. Water pollution control programs sary actions are taken for the prevention, control, and a requirement to address non-point source and abatement of environmental pollution. Execu­ pollution affecting coastal water quality were incor­ tive Order 12088 gives EPA authority to conduct porated. reviews and inspections for the purpose of monitor­ ing federal facility compliance with pollution control Executive Order 11988 (1"1000 Plain Management) standards. Also, each agency shall submit a semi­ The purpose of this directive is to avoid, where annual plan to the Office of Management and practicable alternatives exist, the short and long term Budget for the control of environmental pollution. hazards associated with floodplain development on The plan shall indicate methods of improvement in human health and safety, and environmental impacts the design, construction, management. operation, and maintenance of federal facilities, and shall to fish and wildlife and their habitat. include cost estimates. Federal Water Project Recreation Act 2.5 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS The Policy of this act states that Federal agencies in planning navigation, flood control, reclamation, Idaho, Oregon, Washington hydroelectric, or mUltipurpose water resource proj­ The EPA and States of Idaho, Oregon, and Washing. ects, must consider the potential outdoor recreation­ ton have established surface water criteria or water al opportunities and fish and wildlife enhancement quality standards applicable to the Columbia River that the projects might afford. Basin. This discussion focuses on the State stan­ dards because they are the same as or more strin­ Executive Order 11990 (Protection or Wetlands, gent than the Federal criteria, and are legally en­ 1977) forceable . The codes, rules, and regulations for Agencies, in carrying out their land management these state standards are voluminous, so only se­ responsibilities, are to take action which will mini­ lected highlights of the standards are presented in mize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wet­ this document. All three states have established a lands, and take action to preserve and enhance the policy of antidegradation and beneficial uses for natural and beneficial values of wetlands. their surface waters, which precludes the discharge or introduction of any toxic or hazardous materials Fish and Wildlire Coordination Act that result in significant deleterious effects. The objective of this Act is to provide that wildlife Idaho's beneficial uses are domestic and agricultural conservation receive equal consideration and be water supply, cold-water and warm-water biota, coordinated with other features of water resource salmonid spawning, primary and secondary contact development plans. The Act states that whenever the recreation, and special resource water. All except waters of any stream or other body of water are warm-water biota have been designated as benefi­ proposed or authorized to be impounded, diverted, cial for the Brownlee, Oxbow, , and controlled or modified for any purpose by any entity, Dworshak reservoirs, North Fork of the Clearwater or or permitted by the federal government. the River, and the Snake River downstream of Brownlee entity shall first consult with the United States Fish (Source: Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (BNA), and Wildlife Service, and with the head of the 1991).

1995 FlNALE1S 2-13 2 Waler Quality Appetldix

In a four-level water quality classification system River above the Oearwater River (RM 139.3), no that ranges from AA (extraordinary) to C (fair). the increase over 0.3OC (054°F) caused by human State of Washington has classified the Columbia activity can occur from a single source. or no in­ River from Grand Coulee Dam downstream to the creases over l.l°C (20F) from all activities when the Pacific Ocean and the Snake River as Class A (excel­ stream is over 68 F (200c). In the Snake River lent). Beneficial uses are water suppty (domestic, below the Oearwater River, the I.1OC (2°F) restric­ industrial, agricu ltural); stock watering; fish and tion is dropped in favor of no temperature increase shellfish rearing. spawning. and harvesting; wildlife exceeding t = 34/(T +9)OC where t = change in habitat; recreation (primal)' contact); and commerce temperature and T = background temperature. and navigation (BNA, 1991). Idaho and Washington specify that turbidity shall Oregon defines various portions of the Columbia neither exceed 5 nephelometric turbidity units and Snake rivers as beneficial for public and private (NTU) over background levels when the background domestic supply, industrial water supply, irrigation, level is 50 NTU or less nor have more than a 10 livestock watering, anadromous fish passage, salmo­ percent increase when background is more than 50 nid fish rearing. salmonid fish spawning, resident N11J. Oregon simply specifies the 10 percent fish and aquatic life, wildlife and hunting, fishing, increase criterion (BNA. 1991). boating. water contact recreation, aesthetic quality, Minimum dissolved oxygen standards vary for each hydropower, and commercial navigation and trans­ State. Idaho has specific criteria below existing port (BNA, 1991). dams. From June 15 to October 15, these criteria A total dissolved gas standard of 110 percent satura­ require at least 6.0 milligrams per liter (mgll; tion at ambient atmospheric pressure is the maxi­ 30-day mean). 4.7 mgll (7-day mean minimum), mum level for acceptable tOlal dissolved gas set by 3.5 mgll (instantaneous minimum), and 6 mg/! or 90 the three Stales (BNA, 1991). Each State has. percent of saturation (whiChever is greater) for however, different thermal criteria. slamonid spawning uses. Oregon specifies at least 90 percent of saturation (or portions o( the Colum­ Idaho specifies the criteria in relation to specific use bia mainstem, and Washington specifies at least 8 categories. The most restrictive use criterion is for mg/! for Class A waters (BNA, 1991). salmonid spawning, with maximum water tempera­ tures set at 55°F (13°C) with daily averages no Fecal coliform and pH standards vary among states, greater than 48.2°F (90C). use classifications, and river system reaches. 'JYpical­ Iy. pH is restricted to levels between 6.5 and 8.5 pH I Oregon allows no water temperature increases in the units. Fecal colifonns must be less than tOO organ­ j Columbia River, outside of an assigned mixing zone, isms/tOO ml. when the stream water temperature is at or above 68°F (200c). When the river is 675°F (19.JOC) or Montana less, the Oregon standard dictates that no more than a 0.5°F (0.28°C) increase is allowed due to a single­ Montana water quality regulations are similar to the source discharge. No more than a 2°F (l.IOC) other Pacific Northwest states; water quality criteria are based on beneficia] uses. For major water bodies increase is allowed by all sources when the stream is 66°F (190C) or less. such as the Kootenai and Flathead Rivers., the classification is B-1, with a few minor exceptions. In Washington, no increase over 680F (200C) due to Waters classified as 8-1 are suitable for drinking, human activity is allowed. In addition, no increase culinary, and food processing purposes after conven­ over 0.3°C (054°F) is allowed from Priest Rapids tional treatment; bathing. swimming. and recreation; Dam (river mile. RM 309) to Grand Coulee Dam growth and propagation of salmonid fishes and (RM 595) when the stream is naturally over 68°F associated aquatic lire. waterfowl, and (urbearers; (2QOC). In the lower Columbia River and Snake and agricultural and industrial water supply.

2-14 FlNALEIS 1995 Water QuaJily Appelldix 2

There are also numerical criteria associated with the dissolved oxygen, total dissolved gas saturation, and 8-1 classification. sedimentation. Little work has been done on toxins, heavy metals, pesticides, herbicides, and nutrients. • Dissolved oxygen must not be reduced below In short, work oonducted in the past provides an 7.0 mg/l. incomplete picture of the system's water quality. • Induced pH variation must be less than 0.5 Ongoing and more recent studies conducted by the unit between pH 6.5 and 8.5, with no change United States Geological Survey, Environment outside this range, and natural pH above 7.0 Canada, Washington State Department of Ecology, must be maintained. Oregon State Department of Environmental Quality, • The maximum turbidity increase is 5 NTU and the British Columbia Ministry of Environment above natural background. have provided good scientific data, but are limited to specific locations within the watershed. • For temperature, a 1°F maximum increase above naturally occurring water temperature The Environmental Protection Agency and the states is allowed between 32 to 66°F (0 to 18.90C). conduct water quality monitoring programs to With temperatures between 66°F (18.9OC) establish status and trends, and to assess watersheds. and 65°F (19.20C) discharge is not aUowed Water oolumn data routinely collected include that will increase temperature above 67<'F dissolved oxygen, temperature, fecal coliform, con· (19.90C). Where natural water is 66.5°F ductivity, nutrients, turbidity, pH, and water flow. (19.2OC) or greater, no increase greater than Various stations also collect more site-specific O.50F (0.3OC) is allowed. A maximum 2°F per contaminants of concern. For public water systems hour decrease below naturally occurring supplying communities of year-round residents, water temperature is allowed when water is Safe Drinking Water Act regulations require moni· above 55°F (12.8°C), and a 2°F (1.l0C) toring of coliform, turbidity, inorganics, organics, maximum decrease below naturally occurring and radionuclides. AI sites with surface water com· water temperature is allowed when the natu· ponents, monitoring for potential surface water rally occurring water temperature is between chemical, physical and biological impacts is required. 32 to 55°F (0 to 12.8°C). Land practices, surface water, and ground water are monitored under various projects, many of which • Fo r bacteria, when the water temperature is emphasize riparian areas. above 6()OF (15.6°C), fecal coliforms must neither exceed 2oo organisms per 100 ml nor The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) has a fixed may 10 percent of the total samples during station monitoring network throughout the basi n. any 30-day period exceed 400 organisms per For Idaho, stations were established cooperatively 100 mi. with the State and USGS. In Oregon and Washing· ton, the State instream network sites are different • Also, the numerical Federal water quality than the USGS stations. Parameters monitored criteria and national primary and secondary include dissolved oxygen, temperature, fecal coli· drinking water criteria are inoorporated by form, conductivity, nutrients, turbidity, pH, metals, reference in state laws. major anions and cations, suspended sediments, and water flow. 2.6 WATER QUALITY STUDIES Monitoring by the U.S. Forest Service includes 2.6.1 General Studies traditional water column chemistry, aquatic and riparian habitat parameters, and BMP (Best Man­ Water quality studies and monitoring oonducted on agement Practice) implementation and effectiveness. the Columbia River and its tributaries over the past The type and intensity of monitoring depends on the 20 years have been generally limited to temperature, specific National Forest and Ranger District and the

1995 FlNALEIS 2-15 -

2 Water Quality Appendix

particular issues of concerns. Some forests have For its reservoirs, the U.S Bureau of Reclamation long-tenn trend stations on major streams as they monitors temperature profiles, dissolved oxygen leave the forest. The Region 6 Stream Survey Pro· profiles, dissolved gas, chlorophyll a, Secchi trans­ gram surveys parameters such as pooVriffle ratio, parency. and a range of inorganics including nutri­ amount of woody debris. substrate characterization, ents and metals. The Bureau also routinely monitors and extent of riparian cover. irrigation drain water and works with local Soil and Water Conservation Districts and Irrigation Districts The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers monitors the to monitor effects of their activities. water quality at its reservoirs. Routine parameters Many of the Tribes in the Basin are routinely collect­ include flow, temperature profiles, conductivity, ing water column chemistry data, primarily il'! con­ nutrients, turbidity, Secchi transparency. dissolved junction with fisheries management efforts. 'JYpical oxygen, pH, and dissolved gas. Sediment sampling is parameters include temperature, dissolved oxygen, conducted in selected locations to assess sediment turbidity, and conductivity. contaminants of concern. The Corps has begun sampli ng bed sediments to assess dioxin concentra­ Myriad site-specific monitoring activities are being tions at a few reservoir locations. The Corps also conducted in the basin in conjunction with research, conducts some biological monitoring in its reservoirs planning, regulation, and restoration efforts. A and some groundwater quality monitoring. sampling of these types of efforts in Table 2 -1.

Table 2-1. Sit~Specific Studies in the Columbia Basin

Project Participanl!l

Lower Columbia River Bi-State Study WA, OR, Pulp & Paper Indust. • USGS, Ports National Water Quality Assessment (NAWQA) USGS Middle Snake River EPA,IDEQ Lake Roosevelt Study EPA, WA-DOE Local, USGS Thalatin Basin TMDL OR-DEQ, OR-AG, ODFw, USGS, OGI OSU, PSU I S. Fork Salmon River TMDL IDEQ, USFS Columbia Basin Dioxin TMDL EPNstates National Bioaccumulation Study EPA

Hanford Superfund EPA, WA -DOE J Clean Lakes Projects States , Irrigation Drainage Program USDI Effects of Chlorinated Compound on WA birds USFWS EIS for Channel Deepening Project COE

2-16 FINAL EIS 1995 Waler Quality Appendix 2

Table 2-1 . Site-Specific Studies in the Columbia Basin - CONT

Project Participants

Long Term Management Study COE/NMFS Columbia River Long-Term Biological Monitoring NMFS Willamette River Basin Study ODEQ/uSGS. Industries Columbia River Estuary Thrbidity Maximum LMERUW Fisheries Res.Insl GIS Inventory of Wetlands in Columbia Estuary CREST Sediment Yield Location Maps. Western States sa;

In summary. data needed to provide a reliable Oregon public ports, and the pulp and paper indus­ prediction on the impacts of proposed system regula­ 'ry. tion on many water quali ty parameters are missing. A good balance of common constituents (al leasl for The study, a "reconnaissance survey", is a broad­ total phosphorous and nutrients) is possible. and brush look at the water quality of the lower river. It there are good data on indicator bacteria concentra­ was designed to answer some general questions tions, pH. and specific conductance (Fretwell. M.O. about possible problems. and to help decide wttich USGS. 1992. persona1 communication). Thmperature contaminants and locations warrant further study. It data are also quite good for the sampling stations, was not detailed enough for human health risk but not good enough to fully evaluate the effects of assessments, nor to present a complete picture of impoundments. There is almost no information on water quality in the lower river. organic contaminants and poor data on trace metals. EPA Study ror Northwest Power Planning Council Many ad hoc studies have assessed water quality in short river reaches for short time periods. Other In 1992 Region 10 of the Environmenta1 Protection reaches have received little or no attention. There is Agency (EPA) responded to a request from the infonnation to answer generic questions about Northwest Power Planning Council to lead an inter­ almost any river system but data for quantitative agency study of the water quality in the Columbia answers to site specific question is often unavailable. River Basin. Members of the Columbia River Water Answers to questions about the water quality effects Management Group's Water Quality Committee of dams and reservoirs, pulp mills, and agriculture actively participated in this effort. The ftrst part of the are examples. study consists of a compilation of existing water quality infonnation, determination of additional 2.6.2 Specific Water Quality Studies information needs, and development of a study plan Lower Columbia River Bi-Slate Water Quality for collecting additional infonnation. The short study Siudy report is intended to be one of the many efforts to improve communication and coordination between The 1990 Washington and Oregon Legislatures the water quality agencies and fish restoration appropriated funds for an interstate study of water entities in the Columbia Basin. Belter communication quality in the lower Columbia River. The funds were was found to be crucial at this time, given the Endan­ used to identify and study water quality problems in gered Species Act listing of salmon species and the the Columbia River below Bonneville Dam. Addi­ mounting concerns over the traditional water quality tional funding was provided by the Washington and parameters of temperature and sediment.

1995 FINALE1S 2-17 2 Watt'r Quality Apptndix

Water Budget Environmental Assessment pany's projects - - Brownlee, Oxbow, and Hells Canyon. The Hell s Canyon Environmental Investiga­ 10 September 1982 the Northwest Power Planning tion looked at existing surface and groundwater Council (Council) requested the Corps of Engineers' quality in the study area, potential impacts on water assistance in analyzing the proposed water budget, quality, and additional studies required to evaluate which is part of the Council's Fish and Wildlife water budget impacts, Program. The Program establishes a total water budget of 4.64 million acre-feet (Mat) to be divided Lake Roosevelt Study into 3.45 Mar at Priest Rapids Dam and 1.19 Mar at Lower Granite Dam. The intent of the water budget is to provide improved transportation flows for Lake Roosevelt is the reservoir created by the juvenile anadromous fish during their journey down­ construction of the Grand Coulee Dam on the stream to the Pacific Ocean. Columbia River in 1941. It is the largest lake in Washington and the sixth largest in the United As a result. studies were undertaken by the Corps to States, Despite its importance, there has been no identify the impacts of alternative methods of opera­ comprehensive assessment of the Lake Roosevelt's tion for the water budget, and their impacts on physical, chemical, biological, and hydrological operation for other project purposes. The environ­ processes in the past. 1b fill this knowledge gap, mental assessment evaluates the nonpower impacts citizen groups and responsible State and Federal of the water budget at Oworshak Dam and Reser· agencies decided in 1992 to form the Franklin D. voir. Seven alternatives were considered, and im· Roosevelt (FOR) Water Quality Council. The Coun­ pacts on the following water use considerations cil includes management, technica1, and citizen's assessed: committees. Its major goals are to clean up the lake by preventing pollution from Canada and the United • physical (water and air quality), States, determine the impacts of past pollution, and • biological (aquatic and terrestrial community), prepare a waler quality management plan.

• cultural (land use, recreation, aesthetics and The FOR Water Quality Council has obtained human interest, cultural status, manmade funding to conduct studies and prepare a work plan, facilities and activities), fund citizen participation, and hire a Project Direc­ • ecological (food web). tor, The work plan was fmalized in March 1992 and an integrated assessment study began in July 1992. The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) also The initial focus was on evaluating existing data and prepared an environmental assessment of " Proposed sampling sediment and fish tissue for metals and Power System Changes to Implement the Water toxic contaminants in the reservoir. Reservoir nutri­ Budget", including marketing impacts. A finding of ents and watershed sources of pollution will be more no significant impact (FONSI) was issued in January thoroughly monitored in later years, 1983 for two of the alternatives evaluated. /

The nonpower environmental impacts of the water Regardless of the progress made on controlling budget at the Libby project were also assessed. A pollutants originating in Canada, American entities FONSI for Ubby was issued in July 1983, Conse· are expected to continue identifying and addressing quently, preparation of an environmental impact the lake's water quality problems, This includes assessment was not required. include Washington Ecology, EPA. and groups such as the Lake Roosevelt Water Quality Forum, the An environmental investigation was conducted by a Lake Roosevelt Water Quality Council, the atizen contractor for BPA in 1984 to assess water budget for a Oean Columbia, and the Lake Roosevelt impacts on the operation of the Com- Coordinating Committee.

2-18 F1NALE1S 1995 Water Quality Appendix 2

Kootenay River Basin Water Quality Status Report material within this section will be based on profes­ sional judgment of the contributing preparers or In 1992 and 1993, a coalition of agencies involved in generalizations. The need for additional monitoring the Basin formed the Kootenay is discussed elsewhere in this Appendix. River Network (KRN). The KRN is composed of Federal, provincial, state, tribal, industrial and Libby Water Quality citizen group representatives. Approximately 90% The Kootenai River in Montana was impounded by of the land in the Basin is government-owned or Ubby Dam in March 1972 to form Lake Koocanusa. managed. Several of the participating entities Below Libby Dam, the Kootenai River flows back funded a contractor to prepare a Water Quality into Canada to Kootenai Lake, which flows into the Status Report. The Report documents the history of Columbia River. Water quality data were collected pollution sources and activities affecting water downstream of Libby Dam by the USGS before and quality, fish and recreation in this international after dam construction. In general, the construction watershed (it covers 80% of the Basin in British of Libby Dam reduced discharge extremes, increased Columbia, Idaho and Montana above Kootenay overall water discharge temperatures, decreased Lake). The white sturgeon and bull trout, both summer discharge temperatures. and decreased considered for listing as threatened o r endagered, nutrient levels in the Kootenai River downstream of are present in the Basin. the dam (Whitfield and Woods, 1984). Damming of the Kootenai River also increased the pH of the 2.7 DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONS river, although seasonal changes were observed and were proportional to depth of discharge. 2.7.1 Rsach-by-reach Description Water quality data collected from October 1984 to The Basin's existing water quality conditions will be September 1985 approximately 0.7 mile downstream separated into five major reaches and the following from Libby Dam, reported pH values from 7.9 to parameters will be discussed: toxicants, heavy metals, 8.5; water temperatures from 37 to 61°F (2.5 to turbidity, dissolved gases, temperature, nutrients, 16.00C); dissolved oxygen from 87 to 113 percent pH, sediments, bacteria and radionuclides. saturation; low nutrient concentration (generally <0.1 mgll, Nand <0.01 mgll P); and low total The major reaches are: Origination in British Co­ organic carbon «2.0 mg/l) (USGS, 1986). lumbia, Canada to Grand Coulee Dam; Coulee Dam to the Snake River Confluence; Snake River; Snake Although highly productive (eutrophic) conditions River Confluence to Bonneville Dam; and Bonne· were predicted for Lake Koocanusa, turbid condi­ ville Dam to the Pacific Ocean. In addition, water tions and physical limnological factors caused low quality conditions at Libby and Hungry Horse algal productivity (McKim et aI., 1976). In addition, reservoirs, which are also covered by the Columbia Canadian municipa1 and industrial sources substan­ River System Operation Review, will also be de­ tially reduced nutrient loading into Lake Koocanusa scribed. during the late 19705. Sediments in Lake Koocanusa are calcareous and low in organic matter, have a silty Figure 2-4, originally prepared by B.C. Hydro, is a loam or loam texture, and serve as a phosphorus three-dimension illust ration of the Columbia River sink (Iskandar and Shukle, 1981). Combined with and its major tributaries, including locations and the reduced nutrient loading, this may contribute to elevations of all existing dams. the low productivity of the lake. During spring snow Good usable water quality data is generally limited melt run-off, substantia1 quantities of suspended to specific locations, and data available from most of sediment are discharged to the Kootenai River the long term monitoring programs, with the excep­ downstream of the dam (aliberti, 1980). tion of temperature and dissolved gas data, is either In 1973, game fish popwations were adversely outdated or unreliable. Because of this, much of the affected by high gas supersaturation levels at least 5

1995 FINALEIS 2-19 !

2 Wattr Quolily Ap~"dix

to 6 miles downstream of the Ubby Dam (May. Surface water temperatures vary widely in Hungry 1973). Thlal gas supersaturation levels of up to 130 Horse, ranging from frozen (320F (OOC) in winter to percent were observed in some areas of the river over 73.4°F (23OC) in late summer. The reselVoir (May, 1973). Since Unit 5 began operation in 1984, thermally stratifies in summer (typically June no spill has been necessary and gas supersaturation through September) but is isothennal (no tempera­ levels have generally been below Ito percent. ture gradient) in spring and winter. The water volume in the preferred thennal range for cutthroat There were problems associated with contaminants trout (SO to 6O.SOF (10 to 16OC) is greatest in spring (metals and organochlorides), but these have not and fall (May and Fraley, 1986). been fully investigated with regard to effects on fish. Nutrients have also been mentioned as a concern (or Downstream, hypolimnetie discharges from Hungry Libby Reservoir and the Kootenai River. Horse have lowered the summer water temperatures and raised the winter water temperatures in the A recent report (Knudson, 1994) documents the Flathead River from historical levels (Beattie et aI., effects of land and water use activities, especially 1988). Cold water released from the deep layers of hydropower operations, logging, mining, and un­ the reservoir reduces trout growth in the South Fork treated or poorly treated municipal and industrial and mainstem Flathead Rivers to a fraction of (pulp mill) wastewater on fish, recreation and in­ pre-dam levels. The Northwest Power Planning stream water quality. These activities degraded Council has called on Bonneville Power Administra­ water quality and habitat in the 1960's and 1970's tion and the Bureau of Reclamation to begin actions but were brought under control during the 1980's. aimed at installing a temperature selective withdraw­ An expanded monitoring program is needed to al facility at Hungry Horse Dam. This should mini­ measure the long term effectiveness of the control mize instances of large. rapid and detrimental tem­ program. Monitoring and enforcement programs in perature fluctuations in the flathead River. the Kootenay River Basin are hampered by differ­ ences in water quality criteria and standards across The dissolved oxygen levels in Hungry Hol1it Reser­ the international boundary. voir have been consistently above biologically opti­ mal levels of 7 mg/l, typically in the range of 8 to 10 The Kootenai Tribe of Idaho's Environmental mgll. The pH (in 1985) ranged from 7.4 to 8.9, with Management and Fisheries Departments have been the majority of values between 7.8 to 8.S units. conducting water and sediment quality studies on Specific conductance ranged between 110 to 150 the Kootenai River and its tributaries. This was umhos/em, on the lower end for productivity (May prompted by concerns arising from the white stur­ and Fraley, 1986). geon recovery efforts, and the apparent trophic collapse of the Kootenai River ecosystem. Although Reach I, Origination to Grand Coulee Dam few negative water quality impacts have been re­ The Columbia River begins in Central British Co­ ported to date, the data collection effort is likely lumbia about 400 miles above the city of Castlegar, going to continue for some time. British Columbia. Major tributaries in this reach are the Kootenay, Pend Oreille, and Spokane River. Hungry Horse Water Quality Lake Roosevelt. created by Grand Coulee Dam, Hungry Horse Reservoir was created in 1953 with begins below the Canadian Border near the town of the completion of Hungry Horse Dam on the South Northport, Washington. There are several small Fork of the flathead River, approximately 4 miles towns located on the river in British Columbia. from the confluence with the main stem, which Major industry within this reach is mining, timber, subsequently empties into flathead Lake. Water agriculture, hydropower, tourism, and pulp mills. quality data collected in 1978 indicated that the The Hugh Keenleyside Dam in British Columbia is reselVoir is oligotrophic; Le. low in nutrient input also located in this reach. The purpose of this dam is and primary productivity (May and Weave r, 1987). flood control.

2-20 F1NALEIS 1995 -~ Figure 2-4. The Columbia River and its Tributaries I

2 Waler Qualiry Appendix

Water entering the Columbia River from the Koote­ The three entities have also been conducting scien­ nay and Pend Oreille Rivers meets British Columbia tific studies to detennine the extent of the pollution Ministry of Environment's water quality standards. and how it is affecting the lake and riverine environ­ The Pend OTeille River acts as a major diluter of ment. Over the past 2 years Cominco has taken pollution from Canadian industry located up stream. several steps to eliminate pollution to the river. They have developed an automated spill prevention and Monitoring at International Boundary has shown a clean -up program, constructed ponds and covered dissolved gas problem at certain times of the year. stockpiles to prevent erosion to the river, upgraded Total dissolved gas supersaturation is associated with their water quality treatment facilities, and by 1995 the operation of Canadian hydropoloVer and flood will stop discharging slag into the river. control projects in the upper reaches of the basin. Other not so major sources of pollution to the river The major contributors to the pollution of the river in British Columbia are the Cominco fertilizer plant in this reach for the past 30 to 40 years has been which discharges phosphorous and the nail Sewage from the Celgar Pulp Mill, located near Castiegar, lreatment Plant that occasionally dumps raw sewage s.c., and the Cominco Lead and Zinc smelter into the river, because of a faulty collection system. located in nail, B.C. Past and present studies indicate pollution from the The Celgar Pulp Mill produces a high quality pulp Celgar Pulp Mill and Cominco Metals has been necessary for the production of white paper. The significant, especially heavy metals and trace ele­ bleaching process used in the past has produced ments. Studies showing dioxin and furans in fish also by-products containing large amounts of dioxin, indicate a major problem area, but more studies furans, and fibre which have been directly discharged must be conducted to detennine the amount of into the river. Studies conducted by Canadian and dioxin and turans in the deeper sediments and how United States scientists have shown dioxin/furans operation of the system may distribute the toxins contamination in the rivers sediments, aquatic into the food chain. invertebrates, and fish. The Celgar Pulp Mill has Sources of pollution in the United States to Lake • been upgrading and expanding its facilities during Roosevelt come mainly from old and new mines, the past few years and has installed new technology agriculture, and logging. The magnitude or extent of and water treatment facilities that will eliminate the pollution is not presently known, but studies are discharge of dioxinlfurans and fibre. British Colum­ being conducted in the watersheds to determine the bia Ministry of Environment is presently monitoring impact. the mill for the discharge of other pollutants. The Spokane River enters Lake Roosevelt about 50 The Cominco lead and zinc smelter is the largest of miles down river, The Spokane River's water quality its type in the world, employing several hundred is affected primarily by agriculture, urban develop­ people. Past operations have been very detrimental ment, and industry. to the river's water quality. Studies in Canada and in the United States on Lake Roosevelt have found More accurate scientific studies have probably been large amounts of heavy metals and trace elements. conducted on this reach than any of the other reach­ The plant has also been discharging 300 to 400 tons es. More studies and a long tenn monitoring pro­ of slag per day in the river. This not only scours the gram need to be developed and conducted to com­ river bed, it also deposits harmful material. Since the plement the work already completed. discovery of contamination of the river by Cominco, Ruch 2, Coulee Dam 10 the Snake River Environment Canada, British Columbia Ministry of Environment, and the Lake Roosevelt Water Quality The major tributaries to this reach of the river are Council have been pressuring Cominco to eliminate the Okanogan, Wenatchee and Yakima rivers. There discharges of hannful material to the river. is one federal dam in this reach, , • 2-22 F1NALE1S 1995 1 Water Quality Appendix 2

and several mid-Columbia Public Utility District's Because of the reservation's proximity to the Colum­ dams. These are Wells, Rocky Reach, Rock Island, bia River, any leakage of storage tanks would drain Wanapum, and Priest River Dams. This reach is a toward the 44 miles of the Hanford. This explains major agricultural area producing a variety of food the high interest shown by the public in identifying products for animals and human consumption. and characterizing the wastes that are onsite.

There are two large and several smaller irrigation Since 1957 the Hanford sub-reach of the Columbia projects within this reach that drain directly or River has been monitored for various contaminants indirectly into the river or its tributaries. The major discharged to the River directly or through springs. projects are the Columbia Basin project which In addition, some 700 wells, approximately 140 in extends from Banks Lake to the confluence of the the near-river area, are monitored quarterly for Snake River, and the Yakima Project that extends tracking plumes of contaminants and radionuclides. from northeast of Yakima to the confluence of the So far, no impacts were directly observed on the Snake River. Irrigation return flows containing Columbia River water quality as a result of the nutrients, sediments, and pesticides may impact the Hanford operation. water quality of this reach considerably. Other Analyses made in 1988 revealed low levels of long­ impacts are sedimentation from irrigated farmland lived radionuclides at most locations along the and erosion caused by cattle and sheep. Hanford shoreline. Most of these radionuclides were also found in sediment samples. The levels detected Dams in this reach are operated for flood control, are, however, thought to be far below a health power, and irrigation, and their impacts on water hazard or danger to public health and safety. quality are relatively minor compared to pollution problems caused by agriculture and other sources. The mission of Hanford is now changing from Some of the larger cities located in this reach may nuclear materials production to clean - up and also directly or indirectly impact the rivers water restoration. The U.S. Department of Energy is quality. If any of them are discharging directly into committed to phasing out liquid radioactive waste the river, they would be required to have a 402 discharge to Hanford soils by 1995. Under the NPDES permit, which is regulated by the State of current Superfund action spearheaded by the U.S. Washington. Environmental Protection Agency a thorough survey of springs along the River was conducted in Hanford Sub-Reach 1991. Monitoring activities to assess a broad range of radionuclides and hazardous substances In 1943, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission com­ are scheduled to continue for a few more years. mitted 560 square miles of land in Eastern Washing­ More studies of the river and its tributaries need to ton to the production of radioactive materials for be conducted in this reach, and the Hanford sub­ defense purposes. As part of this operation, dis­ reach. charge and disposal of toxic wastes were made to various underground storage sites on the reserva­ Reach 3, Snake River tion. A total of nine nuclear reactors were also put in service between 1944 and 1987, some of which The Snake River originates in western Wyoming, discharged their cooling water into the Columbia flows through Idaho, and enters the Columbia River River. For national security reasons, access to specif­ near Pasco, Washington. The major use of Snake ic information on operational and waste disposal River water is for barge traffic, recreation, power, practices at Hanford was limited to only those and irrigation. Dams that may affect water quality directly involved for many years. Studies on the on the Snake River are Brownlee, Oxbow, Hells long-term potential environmental impacts of the Canyon, Lower Granite, Little Goose, Lower Monu­ operation also have generally not been made public. mental, Ice Harbor, and Dworshak Dams. Dams

1995 FINALEIS 2-23 2 Water Quality Appendix

higher up in the system probably do not directly approximately 8 to 20 days, depending on the flows. affect Columbia River's water quality. Therefore, thermal stratification (vertical tempera­ ture gradients decreasing from top to bottom) is Eight long term water quality monitoring sites are rare, but during some low flow years, stratification located on the Snake River. Monitoring dates range may occur for short periods and range up to 7°F from 1975 to 1992 and are located at Burbank, WA; (3.9°C). In general, however, the maximum differ­ Ice Harbor, WA; Lower Monumental, WA; Little ence is about 4°F (2.2°C). Temperatures are gener~ Goose, WA; Lower Granite, WA; Lower Granite at ally lower during the spring of a high flow year, but river mile 120, WA; Anatone, WA; and Weiser, they increase in July or August. Idaho (see Figure 2-1). The primary parameters measured at these locations were water temperature, Vigg and Watkins (1991) have further characterized specific conductance, dissolved oxygen, and pH. temperature in the Snake River as follows: Most of these stations were only sampled once or twice per year and, in most cases, not every year. "Mean water temperature in the lower Snake during 1985-89 was above 70°F (21°C) from 17 July to 19 The United States Geological Survey has a long August; considerable annual variation occurred with term monitoring station on the Clearwater River at temperatures exceeding 70°F (21°C) from 10 July to Spaulding, Idaho. They also sample for water tem­ 14 September in individual years. Based on an perature and specific conductance, suspended sedi­ analysis of 1938 to 1966 USGS data, the effect of the ment, turbidity, total Phosphorous, dissolved oxygen, hydropower system and other anthropomorphic and pH. (human -caused) changes on temperature in the The spill over the dams in the lower Snake River Columbia River became apparent in the mid -1950s; has increased dissolved gas saturation, although the major effect has been shifting temperature pre-dam conditions might have also experienced maximums so that warmer temperatures occur later supersaturation. Total dissolved gas saturation in the year (EPA and NMFS, 1971; Crawford etal., levels in the lower Snake River are influenced by 1976). The most significant changes have been flow from the Clearwater River (including releases above the confluence of the Snake and Columbia from Dworshak) as well as the middle Snake rivers. Pre-dam (1955 to 1958) water temperatures River, and typically range from 105 to 110 percent were high (greater than nOF (22°C)) in the lower saturation in Lower Granite forebay during the Snake River during mid-July to late August spring in high flow years. Saturation levels succes­ (FWPCA, 1967). Other human-caused watershed sively increase downstream through the Little disruptions (e.g., defoliation [loss of riparian vegeta­ Goose, Lower Monumental, Ice Harbor, and tion] and water diversion) probably elevated maxi­ McNary forebays when all projects are spilling. mum temperatures over historic levels in the Snake Installation of spillway deflectors at Lower Gran­ River Basin (for example, irrigation-associated ite, Little Goose, and Lower Monumental dams influences increased river temperature 6°F (3.3°C) has reduced the levels of total dissolved gas super­ to 7°F (3.9°C) between Parker and Kiona in the saturation associated with spillway discharges. Yakima River (FWPCA, 1967)". However, maximum supersaturation ranging from 110 to 140 percent has still been observed for The Snake River has a significant effect on the extended periods during high flow events. This hydrology and water quality of the Columbia River exceeds the state standard and federal criteria of because of the respective volumes of water involved. 110 percent saturation (Corps of Engineers, Large amounts of sediments are transported from 1984-92). the Snake River into the Columbia. If these sedi­ ments contain large amounts of contaminants, such Water storage capacity at the four lower Snake River as hydrocarbons, pesticides, nutrients, and organo­ reservoirs is very limited and retention time is chlorines, impacts could be significant.

2-24 FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix 2

Commerce or transportation of goods and services In summary, the waters of the lower and middle to and from the Columbia River up the Snake River Snake River are degraded; the waters are high in to Lewiston, Idaho is very important to the economy bacteria and nutrients, resulting in high productivity. of the area. Barging requires dredging of navigation Water temperatures are somewhat elevated and channels deep and wide enough for safe navigation. depleted of dissolved oxygen in certain areas. Dredging can have a significant impact on the Although not well documented, it is likely that hydrology, water quality, and aquatic ecology of the organic residuals associated with pesticide and river. Commerce can also pollute the river's water herbicide applications are also present. All of these with gas and oil spills and accidental spills of various observations are consistent with the quality of contaminants from barges. irrigation return water, which constitutes a high percentage of the middle Snake River flow. Agriculture in the drainage basin has an impact on Clearwater River Water Quality water qUality. It is known to contribute large Data for the Clearwater River System are limited, amounts of sediments to the river and other chemi­ although studies are being conducted that may cals used for farming. Water quality conditions for provide useful information. A major human-in­ other parameters in the middle Snake River have duced effect on the Clearwater System is Dworshak been summarized as follows (Idaho Department of Reservoir. This storage reservoir is deep (600 feet Health and Welfare, 1982). in the forebay) and narrow; consequently, the lake thermally stratifies every year with a thermocline at "The Snake River trend stations have historically approximately 40 to 50 feet. Deep water (below 40 recorded escalating concentrations of bacteria, to 50 feet) temperatures remain consistent through­ nutrients, and suspended sediment as the river flows out the year at about 39°P (4°C) to 41°P (5°C). from Marsing to Weiser. A current comparison of Retention time in the reservoir is about 1 year. The water quality between Marsing and Weiser cannot be reservoir has been characterized as oligotrophic (i.e., determined due to insufficient data at Marsing; low in productivity and nutrient limited). however, the Snake [River] at the Weiser station The USGS station at Spaulding, Idaho, a National continues to reflect consistently high nutrients and Stream Quality Accounting Network station, pro­ sediment. Bacterial densities exceed criteria for vides data on other water quality parameters. Data primary contact recreation (May-September) at from the most recent available year are consistent Weiser. Subsequent decreases in bacteria and with the oligotrophic characterization of the reser­ suspended sediment are observed below Hells Can­ voir and indicate exceptional water quality that is yon Dam, after the river has passed through Brown­ low in dissolved solids and devoid of inorganic lee, Oxbow, and Hells Canyon Reservoirs. Nutrients contaminants. continue to be of concern below the dam accompa­ nied by occasional low dissolved oxygen [concentra­ Reach 4, Snake River Confluence to Bonneville tion] levels. Toxaphene residues, in concentrations Dam associated with reduced growth and reproductive There are three large dams, one irrigation project failure, have been detected in fish taken from the and several smaller streams that empty into the Snake River at Weiser and ". Columbia River in this reach. The dams are McNary, John Day, and The Dalles Dams. The The report also states that non-point source inputs Umatilla Irrigation Project is located near McNary from irrigation returns and grazing areas are the Dam. Water quality data for this reach is minimal principal pollution problems in the reservoir com­ with the exception of temperature and dissolved plex. The EPA has classified the middle Snake oxygen at Umatilla and McNary Dam. River as having marginal water quality (receiving Agriculture in the drainage basin of the river has an moderate or intermittent pollution) (BPA,198S). impact on water quality, but sufficient data is not

1995 FINALEIS 2-25 2 Water Quality Appendix

available to quantify its impact, if any. Because this Recent investments in pollution abatement by lower reach is below the confluence of the Snake River, Columbia River industries include $38 million by dam and reservoir operation and maintenance may Boise Cascade Corporation at its pulp mill in St. have a measurable effect on the distribution of Helens and $18 million by James River Corp at sediments and other contaminants to the Columbia Wauna. Both mills converted from chlorine to chlo­ River. rine dioxide for bleaching pulp in white paper production. This is expected to substantially reduce In conclusion more work needs to be done in this chlorine discharges and the trace amounts of dioxin reach to determine existing and operational impact which accompany these discharges. on water quality. The impacts of the ocean tide can be felt as far Reach 5, Bonneville Dam to Pacific Ocean upstream as the Bonneville Dam. Salinity intrusion (salt content of 2 parts per million or more) also Bonneville Dam is the last major downstream dam affects the lower 20 to 30 miles of the Lower Colum­ on the Columbia River. Major tributaries in this bia River. The extent of the intrusion largely de­ reach are the Willamette, Lewis, and Cowlitz Rivers. pends on the combination of tidal range, river Portland, Oregon and Vancouver, Washington are morphology, and streamflow. Based on survey data, the largest cities in this reach along with several a maximum tidal range of 6.9 feet combined with a smaller towns. Commerce traffic is heavy in this low streamflow of 110,000 cfs pushed the distance of reach and industrial and urban discharges numerous. intrusion to about 25 miles up-river. This distance was reduced to about 20 miles when the maximum The latest water quality study for this reach was a tidal range was 9.2 feet and the streamflow reached reconnaissance survey commissioned by the Lower 182,000 cfs (McConnell et aI., 1979). Operations of Columbia Bi-State Water Quality Program. The the dams above Bonneville Dam may play an impor­ study was designed to answer general questions tant role in distributing the contaminants down­ regarding possible water quality problems and to stream into the estuary, and limiting salinity instru­ determine further study needs in different locations. sion upstream.

The study looked for heavy metals, bacteria, pesti­ Materials dredged from the federal navigation cides, PCB's, dioxin and furans, and other conven­ channel along the main stem of the Columbia River tional pollutants. With the exception of radionu­ consists of clean medium and fine sands. Physical clides, all contaminants were found in either the analyses of the dredged areas show little change in river's water column, sediments, benthic communi­ characteristics over the last 60 years. Because the ties, or many species of fish. The majority, with the material dredged is defined as a coarse grain materi­ exception of organic contaminants in the water al, is low in organic content, and comes from a high column, exceeded state and federal water quality energy environment removed from known contami­ criteria. nant sources, the material dredged from the main ship channel meets exclusive criteria described in the Contaminants were found downstream from Port­ Clean Water Act [40 CFR 230.60 (a), (b),]. land, Vancouver, St. Helens, Kalama, Longview, and Wauna. They most likely came from sewage treat­ Maintenance dredging is coordinated through a ment plants, pulp mills, barges and ships, marinas, public process, and a water quality certification is and other large and small businesses. Contaminants issued by the States of Oregon and Washington. found in the river have a detrimental impact, not Both states include provisions regarding allowable only on water quality but to the aquatic flora and mixing zones for impacts related to turbidity and fauna living in or next to the river. Further studies dissolved oxygen. Meeting the criteria has not been need to be conducted to determine the severity and a problem in the past because of limited turbidity source(s) of the pollutants. increase at the dredging or disposal sites. Further,

2-26 FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix 2

any water quality impacts associated with dredging been found below pulp mills in the Willamette are temporal in nature, lasting only as long as the Valley. operation. Columbia Slough The factors affecting total dissolved gas saturation in the Columbia River are similar to those described The Columbia Slough is an 18-mile canal which earlier for the lower Snake River. When spilling is parallels the Columbia River from Fairview Creek in minimal (September through March), the saturation East Multnomah County to Kelley Point Park in level is near normal (100 percent). However, total North Portland. It is considered one of the most dissolved gas concentrations increase to as much as polluted water bodies in Oregon. Until 1948, the 140 percent during heavy spill from April through slough was regularly flushed by the Columbia River. August. It was plugged during the Vanport flood of that year when sand filled pipes under the levee at Marine Drive and NE 17th Avenue. Lower Columbia River water temperatures vary seasonally and have a recorded range from 31°F The City of Portland has committed $125 million to (-0.5°C) to 75°F (24°C). Winter temperatures eliminate the flow of raw sewage into the slough (December to March) range from 32°F (O°C) to during storms. But toxic waste from adjacent indus­ 48°F (9°C), and from March and June, water tem­ tries, including serious concentrations of heavy peratures rise to about 58°F (14°C). By August, the metals, will remain on the bottom of the slough. river usually warms to its annual maximum average Pollutants include arsenic, chromium, lead, mercury, of 68°F (20°C). and chemicals such as toluene, polychlorinated biphenols, and dioxin. Leaching from the st. Johns Based on the most recent USGS State Water Re­ landfill and from contaminated groundwater are sources Data Reports, concentrations of dissolved additional problems. One proposed remedy is to oxygen are relatively high, ranging from approxi­ remove the plug and flush the slough but questions mately 70 to 135 percent saturation, with a mean have been raised about the impacts of such an saturation of 105 percent. Other previous studies operation on Willamette and Columbia River water have also shown that the pH value generally ranges quality. from 6.4 to 8.5 pH units (Corps, 1977). Fecal coli­ form bacteria, expressed as Most Probable Number 2.7.2 Water Quality Concerns by Subbasin (MPN), have recently ranged from < 1 to 120 colo­ nies per 100 ml. 'lYpically, MPN values have been under 40 colonies per 100 ml. Problems identified for the subbasins are summa­ rized in Thble 2-2, as directly excerpted from a 1992 EPA's letter report to the Northwest Power Planning While the Willamette River is not included in the Council. As most of them are not well quantified, System Operation Review, this major tributary of the the list does not indicate how strong the evidence is Columbia has been a major consideration in regional nor how widespread the problem may be. The lack concerns about water quality for many years. Nation­ of understanding is especially true with respect to al attention was claimed by Willamette River clean­ the combined or cumulative effects of these prob­ up efforts in the late 1960s and 70s. Recently, how­ lems. Temperature and sedimentation are clearly the ever, new concerns about the river's condition have most commonly identified problems. It should be materialized. In addition to pollution from Port­ noted that Thble 2-2, Water Quality Concerns by land's combined sewer outflows during storm events, Subbasin, was based on best professional judgment, high levels of dioxin and some deformed fish have not on hard data.

1995 FINALEIS 2-27 2 Water Quality Appendix

Table 2-2. Water Quality Concerns by Subbasin (Source: EPA's letter report to NPPC, 1992)

Subbasins Water Quality Problems Data Gaps

Basin-wide Temperature, sedimentation dissolved gas, Metals, pesticides General dioxin PCBs, groundwater Columbia River Temperature, PCBs, dioxins, {urans, Industrial organics /estuary pesticides, metals, bacteria radionuc. Mainstem below Temperature, PCBs, dioxins, pesticides, fluoride Bonneville Dam metals, bacteria, DO, TSS Willamette River Temperature, PCBs, dioxins, {urans, metals, radio-chemicals nutrients, pesticides, DO, pH, sedimentation, chemicals bacteria Coast Fork Nutrients, DO, pH, sedimentation, Tributaries temperature, bacteria, mercury (Cottage Grove Reservoir), flows Coast Range Bacteria, DO, algae, nutrients, pH, sedimentation Clackamas Bacteria, metals McKenzie Organics, metals Molalla/Pudding Nutrients, DO, pesticides, sedimentation, temperature, bacteria, oil & grease, TSS Middle Fork Santiam/Cala- Bacteria, organics pooia Tualatin Nutrients, algae, DO, bacteria, pH, Sediment sedimentation, metals, organics, TSS, contaminants pesticide Sandy River sedimentation, DO temperature Grays River sedimentation, habitat alteration Elochoman River /Germany sedimentation, habitat alteration Creek Kalama River temperature, sedimentation

Washougal River metals, nutrients, sediments, DO, temperature, temperature bacteria, oil, grease, ammonia, pH, chloride Lewis River nutrients, sedimentation, DO, temperature, temperature bacteria, ammonia Cowlitz River total dissolved gasses, sedimentation, TSS, DO, temperature bacteria, temperature, (Longview ditches: organics, metals, DO, bacteria, oil & grease) Mainstem, Bonneville total dissolved gases, temperature, dioxins, metals, PCBs, f1uo- to Priest Rapids: {urans, pesticides, PCB's, metals, ride

2-28 FINALEIS 1995 Water Quality Appendix 2

Table 2-2. Water Quality Concerns by Subbasin - CONT

Hood River pesticides, nutrients, sedimentation, bacteria, oil & grease, aquatic weeds, TSS Deschutes River temperature, DO, sediments nutrients, bacteria, pesticides aquatic weeds John Day River temperature, sedimentation, nutrients, DO, pH, metals pesticides bacteria, aquatic weeds, habitat alto Umatilla River temperature, sedimentation, pH, DO, nutrients, metals pesticides, bacteria, aquatic weeds Wind River impaired spawning area Big White Salmon temperature, bacteria temperature Klickitat River cold temperature, sediments, DO, bacteria temperature Walla River temperature, sedimentation, nutrients, pesticides, metals salinity, TSS, DO, bacteria Mainstem Snake, mouth to temperature, sedimentation total dissolved gases, pesticides Hells Canyon algae nutrients, DO, organics Tucannon River temperature, bacteria, TSS Palouse River sedimentation, nutrients, temperature, bacteria, oil & grease, pH, metals, DO, ammonia Clearwater River temperature, sedimentation, metals, habitat metals nutrients, alteration, metals, pesticides, nutrients, DO, sediments, habitat priority, organics, bacteria, oil & grease, ammonia alteration Grande Ronde R. temperature & sedimentation, nutrients, BOD, metals DO, pH, habitat alteration, bacteria Salmon River temperature, habitat alteration, sedimentation metals habitat pesticides, ammonia, DO,metals & low pH alteration sediments (Panther Creek), nutrients Imnaha River temperature, habitat alteration, sedimentation Snake Mainstem above temperature, sedimentation DO, pH, nutrients, pesticides Hells Canyon Dam bacteria algae, ammonia, pesticides

Burnt River temperature & sedimentation, nutrients, metals DO, BOD, pH, loss of cover Payette River temperature, eutrophication (Cascade metals Reservoir), sedimentation, pH, DO, nutrients Owyhee/Malheur Rivers temperature, sedimentation, pH, DO, nutrients, trace elements (As, HG), pesticides, algae, flow Boise River temperature, coliform bact., turbidity, nutrients, metals DO, pH, BOD, flow, sedimentation, oil & grease Mainstem, Priest Rapids to total dissolved gases, dioxins, furans, pesticides, PCBs, trihalome­ Chief Joseph temperature, metals thane diss. gas

1995 FINALEIS 2-29 2 Water Quality Appendix

Table 2-2. Water Quality Concerns by Subbasin - CO NT

Yakima River temp. (passage & rearing), pesticides, sediments, metals DO, ammonia, pH, nutrients, algae, bacteria, chloride, metals, priority organics Crab Creek temperature, sedimentation, nutrients, pH, pesticides bacteria, ammonia Wenatchee River temperature, pesticides, sedimentation metals Entiat River temperature Lake Chelan pesticides, metals, ammonia, nutrients, bacteria Methow River temperature, sedimentation Okanogan River temperature, sedimentation, pesticides, DO, DO, pH nutrients pH, Mainstem, Chief Joseph metals, dioxins, furans (LK.,Roosevelt), dissolved gas to Canadian Border bacteria (Nespelem R.) Kootenai River total dissolved gases, sediments Clark Fork River metals, sedimentation, habitat alteration sediments pH, nutrients Flathead River temperature, too cold, reduced productivity, sediments nutrients total dissolved gases Pend Oreille/Spokane River metals (Zn, Cd), PCB's, DO, pesticides, DO, sediments nutrients, pH, sedimentation, ammonia, TSS, nutrients nutrients, temp. bacteria, chloride, aquatic weeds

2.8 BASINWIDE STATUS OF WATER QUALITY Controlling point and nonpoint source pollution -­ municipal and industrial wastes, soil erosion, return Water quality parameters which can be affected by flow from agricultural lands -- is also a long-term reservoir regulation are discussed in general terms in endeavor. It depends primarily on the actions of Exhibit A. The status of some of the most important state and federal regulatory agencies. The Corps of of them, including trends, is given in Exhibit B. This Engineers, Bonneville Power Administration, and material is entitled "Columbia River System Opera­ the Bureau of Reclamation have little direct control tion Review, Historical and Current Water Quality over these sources of pollution except to providing Conditions", June 1993, and was prepared by Ebasco flows to dissipate serious discharges when they Environmental. Figure 2-5 is a graphic summary of occur. Because water quality problems are caused water quality concerns in the area covered by the by sources both internal and external to the streams, Corps' North Pacific Division. they should be resolved jointly by all interested and affected parties. Dramatic improvement in water quality conditions in the Columbia River Basin is not expected in the Continuation of current system operations is not near-term. Many current and proposed reservoir expected to affect water quality in the Columbia operations have an adverse effects. This includes River Basin to any appreciable extent. Such an spill to improve fish passage and reservoir draw­ assumption, however, is not an assured possibility. down. Both of these measures are intended to Public opinion, expressed both nationally and re­ promote the recovery of salmon; determining their gionally, indicates dissatisfaction with the emphasis effectiveness could require years of monitoring. on traditional benefits, power generation, flood

2-30 FINALEIS 1995 t Figure 2-5. US Corps of Engineers North Pacific Division's Water Quality Concerns ~ 2 Water Quality Appendix

control, and navigation. Recreation, environment, River Basin. The need for protective measures will and fishery interests are seeking a more active role grow with the normal increases in population and in the allocation of water resources and day-to-day expected industrial development. Because water water management. The Northwest Power Planning quality problems are diverse, stemming from both Council's Fish and Wildlife Plan requires the aug­ in-stream and out-of-stream sources, all inter­ mentation of flows and construction of special ested and affected parties should join in to provide facilities for fish. The listing of several salmon the required solution(s). species under the Endangered Species Act has Unfortunately, current water quality information required the preparation of recovery plans. This is needed for effective water quality management is another major change in the circumstances under limited. Because reservoir regulation can affect which river planning and operation occurred in the water temperature, total dissolved gas, and sediment past. transport, important information about system operations was secured. But impacts on other pa­ 2.9 CONCLUSIONS rameters also need to be assessed to identify cumu­ lative and synergistic effects. Additional holistic Good water quality is very important to human water quality studies and long term monitoring are health, fish and wildlife, recreation, the aquatic needed to determine how river operations will affect environment, and the economy of the Columbia water quality in the future.

2-32 FINALEIS 1995