Environmental Impact Statement for Bonneville Unit, Central Utah Project

Page 92

Response: This subject is discussed in the response to comments 6 and 10 above. >, ' 21. Comment: i:, The water-quality analysis is inadequate. It does not include an ? adequate data base to justify the conclusions that are made regarding ; the heavy metals and eutrophicat ion problems. The analysis was done |{, using out-of-date state water quality standards, and it did not account ^ for Utah's antidegradation policy. The analysis of various minimum )A streamflows and their impacts which was recently completed, but not 0 made available to the public, should have been included in the impact J statement. The discussion of salinity impacts should reflect current £f conditions and information. £& Response: W: Section C-6 of the FES presents additional water quality data collected by the Bureau of Reclamation and contains an expanded discussion on the potential problems at Jordanelle Reservoir. Water quality analysis is continuing. The Environmental Protection Agency has been contacted concerning the water quality analysis, and a draft water quality appendix is available for use by the agency. Existing water quality was compared with all applicable standards.. These included the State's Class C and new standards, EPA's National Interim and Primary Drinking Water Standards, and EPA's 1976 Quality Criteria for Water. Recommended levels presented in the water quality tables in Attachment I to the FES are the most stringent applicable standard. State Class CC standards were given as only a general indica­tion of overall quality. The new State standards were not specifically referred to because they are no more strict than Class C and EPA stan­dards, and to date they have not been approved by EPA. The initial water quality analysis for the Municipal and Industrial System was made before the new standards were adopted by the State. The earlier stand­ards were compared with the adopted standards, and it was determined that the changes were insignificant and the work involved to change the printed tables and text was not justified. The Bureau will refer to and use the new State standards in all new analyses when those standards are approved or changed by EPA. No segments of the Provo River are desig­nated as antidegradation segments under Utah's new water-quality stand­ards. Even if Provo River had been designated as such, construction of the Jordanelle Dam would not be precluded. The State's antidegradation policy is designed to protect waters of exceptionally high quality (better than State standards). According to State regulations: "Projects such as, but not limited to construction of dams or roads will be considered in antidegradation segments on a case-by-case basis where pollution will result only during the actual construction activity, and where best management practices will be employed to minimize pollution effects." 39