 |
||
|
Great Lakes |  |
 |
||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Niagara River Toxics Management Plan (NRTMP) ReportsProgress Report and Work Plan - May 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The Niagara River flows 60 kilometres or 37 miles from Lake Erie to Lake Ontario. It serves as a source for drinking water, fishing grounds, and vacation spots. It generates electricity, and provides employment to millions of people. Unfortunately, the River is also the recipient of toxic wastes that pollute its waters and prevent us from fully enjoying its beneficial uses. Since 1987, the Niagara River has been the focus of attention for four environmental agencies in Canada and the U.S., referred to here as The Four Parties. In February 1987, Environment Canada, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region II, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the Four Parties ) signed a Declaration of Intent (DOI). The purpose of the DOI is to achieve significant reductions of toxic contaminants in the Niagara River.
Eighteen priority toxics were specifically targeted for reduction, ten of which, because they were thought to have significant Niagara River sources, were designated for 50% reduction by 1996. The Niagara River Toxics Management Plan (NRTMP) is the program designed to achieve these reductions. In December 1996, the Four Parties signed a Letter of Support, pledging their continued commitment to reduce toxic chemical inputs to the Niagara River, to achieve ambient water quality that will protect human health, aquatic life, and wildlife, and while doing so, improve and protect water quality in Lake Ontario as well. The 1999 Progress Report highlights some of the most significant accomplishments since the NRTMP began, and discusses evidence of continuing concerns due to toxic substance contamination. The 1999 Annual Work Plan describes the actions that the Four Parties and individual agencies are taking or will take to reduce the amount of toxic chemicals going into the Niagara River from various sources, and to monitor progress. NYSDEC/EPA and MOE have previously presented point source daily load data showing greater than 50% reductions in the priority toxics. NYSDEC and EPA have also presented information on progress in remediation of hazardous waste sites. This progress report presents corroborative evidence of progress, to gauge the effectiveness of these actions. The key sources of information used in assessing progress are:
The primary method of assessment is the Upstream/Downstream Program. The program collects bi-weekly1 water and suspended sediment samples from the head and mouth of the river to measure the changes in the concentrations and loads of more than 90 chemicals. An advanced statistical model was used to determine trends for the eighteen priority toxics for the period 1986/87 to 1996/97, and to determine with more certainty, the effectiveness of reductions of chemical loads to the river. Results show that there have been statistically significant reductions in the concentrations and loads for most of the eighteen priority toxics. In many cases the reductions have been greater than 50%. For some chemicals, the reductions observed are due, in part, to the effectiveness of remedial activities at Niagara River sources in reducing chemical inputs to the river. Results from the biomonitoring program were also used to corroborate progress. Juvenile fish, including spottail shiners and other species, collected at several sites along the Niagara River, revealed reductions in chlorobenzene and PCB concentrations. Examples presented in the progress report indicate a reduction of contaminants in caged mussels located near known sources of pollution. These reductions point to the effectiveness of remedial programs in reducing the inputs of contaminants to the Niagara River. Juvenile fish collected at upstream locations in two Niagara River tributaries suggest additional areas for investigation of contaminant sources. Many toxic pollutants are principally conveyed through waterways attached to suspended sediments. Dated sediment core samples, collected from the Niagara River depositional zone in Lake Ontario, tell the history of toxic chemical loadings from the Niagara River to Lake Ontario. The concentrations of many chemicals in these cores have decreased significantly since the 1960s and 70s. The data show that suspended sediments flowing through the Niagara River are becoming cleaner and cleaner. The older contaminated sediments in this depositional area are being buried by the new, cleaner sediments. Each of the above monitoring programs supports the conclusion that remedial activities have had an effect in reducing the loads of chemicals to the river. This is the overall goal of the Niagara River Declaration of Intent and the NRTMP. Despite the successes to date, more work needs to be done. Several chemicals are still at levels that exceed the most stringent government water quality criteria in the River. Advisories to limit consumption of sportfish caught in the Niagara River continue due to toxic contamination. There is evidence of continuing sources of chemical contamination in the River. Inputs from Lake Erie are also important for some chemicals. The activities in the 1999 Work Plan reflect the commitment of the Four Parties to continue to reduce toxic chemical inputs to the River and to monitor the progress. This commitment includes:
__________________________________________________
In February, 1987, Environment Canada, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region II, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (the Four Parties) signed a Declaration of Intent (DOI). The purpose of this Declaration is to achieve significant reductions of toxic contaminants in the Niagara River. Eighteen priority toxics were specifically targeted for reduction (Table 1), ten of which, because they were thought to have significant Niagara River sources, were designated for 50% reduction from Canadian and U.S. point and non-point sources by 1996. The Niagara River Toxics Management Plan (NRTMP) is the program designed to achieve these reductions. The NRTMP Work Plan identifies activities taken by the Four Parties to remediate sources and to monitor progress toward protecting the River. The Four Parties have used a variety of information to assess progress. For example, NYSDEC/EPA and MOE have presented point source daily load data showing greater than 50% reductions in the priority toxics. Reductions in point and non-point source loads for certain priority toxic chemicals were also indicated by ambient river and biomonitoring data. NYSDEC and EPA have presented information on progress in remediation of hazardous waste sites. The ambient river data have yielded definitive trend information after application of an advanced statistical model developed specifically for this purpose. The trend information is useful for assessing progress in meeting the 50% reduction goal. This report presents corroborative evidence of progress. The information presented includes:
Detailed reports are available elsewhere (see References). The Four Parties are committed to continuing the reduction of toxic chemical inputs to the Niagara River, and to assessing the effectiveness of remedial activities at Niagara River sources in reducing the concentrations of these chemicals in water and biota. At a public meeting in December 1996, the Four Parties signed a Letter of Support reaffirming their commitment to the NRTMP. In the Letter of Support, the Four Parties agreed to make progress toward the following goal:
The 1999 Progress Report also presents information on continuing concerns due to toxic
contamination in the Niagara River, such as exceedances of water quality criteria and
contamination of sportfish. The Work Plan addresses tasks to achieve the Four-Party goal,
and to monitor and report progress. 2THE UPSTREAM/DOWNSTREAM MONITORING PROGRAM The Upstream/Downstream Program collects both water and suspended sediment samples from the head (Fort Erie = FE), and mouth (Niagara-on-the-Lake = NOTL) of the Niagara River. Data from the Niagara River Upstream/Downstream Program and a statistical model were used to measure progress toward reducing the inputs of the 18 priority toxics to the Niagara River. This program has measured, on a bi-weekly basis2, the changes in the concentrations and loads of over 90 chemicals in the water entering and leaving the Niagara River. Using state-of-the-art sampling and analytical methodologies, the program has been able to detect chemicals at very low concentrations--much lower than those allowed by the detection limits used in source monitoring programs. The Upstream/Downstream Program data set is one of the best, if not the best, monitoring data set in the Great Lakes Basin. The fact that the program has been designed and operated by a single agency, Environment Canada, has ensured the consistency of field and laboratory work and data management. Four Party audits and peer review of the quality of field and laboratory work are done regularly. Both seasonal and large, week to week, fluctuations in the Niagara River Upstream/Downstream data made discernment of a trend in the concentration and load data difficult. Compounding this difficulty was the fact that the concentrations of many chemicals, particularly organic chemicals, were so diluted (due to the river’s high rate of flow) that they were often below analytical detection limits. Furthermore detection limits changed during the period of record. A statistical model was needed to determine trends. 2.1THE STATISTICAL
MODEL A model was developed that could determine reliable trends for the 18 Niagara River priority toxics. Model output would also help answer the fundamental question: Have remedial programs implemented at Niagara River sources been effective in reducing the loads of these chemicals to the river? . Detailed discussion of the development and application of the model is presented elsewhere (El-Shaarawi and Al-Ibrahim 1996). For this report, the model was applied to the eleven years of data for the eighteen priority toxics collected between 1986/87 and 1996/97. The same data were then examined on a year-by-year basis and compared with the modelled eleven-year trends to determine possible explanations for the changes observed. 2.2
RESULTS FROM
APPLICATION OF THE STATISTICAL MODEL Table 2 presents examples of results for the per cent change in the concentrations and loads of selected chemicals (for which a statistically valid trend could be determined) from the list of eighteen priority toxics between 1986/87 and 1996/97. These examples were chosen because they illustrate trends exhibited by many of the other eighteen priority toxics. Data for both the suspended sediment and water (dissolved) phases sampled at Fort Erie and Niagara-on-the-Lake are included.
While the numbers have changed from those presented in the last NRTMP progress report (based on comparison between 1986/87 and 1995/96), the overall picture has not. The results show that, with a few exceptions, there have been statistically significant reductions in the concentrations and loads of these chemicals over the eleven-year period in both phases, at both FE and NOTL. In many cases, the reductions have been greater than 50%. In general, decreases in chemical concentrations result in decreases in chemical loads. There are, however, situations in which a chemical shows an increase in mean concentration, but a decrease in the load (eg., see benzo(a)pyrene). This is most evident for chemicals on suspended solids. Loads are dependent on both the chemical concentration and the river flow; for chemicals on suspended solids, the load is also dependent on the concentration of solids in the water column. Both the suspended solids concentrations and flow in the Niagara River decreased substantially over the period from 1986 to 1997 (Niagara River Data Interpretation Group (NRDIG) 1999). One possible explanation is, therefore, that while the concentration of the chemical increased, this was offset by the decrease in river flow and suspended solids concentrations over the same period. The result was a decrease in the overall load of this chemical. Figures 1 through 10 are graphs of the actual data and the model output for the concentrations of dieldrin, PCB, hexachlorobenzene (HCB), mirex and octachlorostyrene (OCS).
Decreases in the concentrations and loads of chemicals which are detected only at NOTL (eg., mirex and OCS) serve as the best examples of the effectiveness of remedial activities in reducing the inputs of chemicals from river sources. Many of the eighteen priority toxics, however, are detected at both FE and NOTL and exhibited significant decreases in concentrations and loads at both stations. The question, therefore, was whether the observed decreases at NOTL were due to decreases in Lake Erie inputs or, to remedial programs implemented at sources along the river. As the loads from sources along the river are reduced at a faster rate than those from Lake Erie, the contribution of the FE inputs to what goes out from the Niagara River into Lake Ontario at NOTL should increase (Williams et al 1992); that is, the ratio FE/NOTL for the concentrations/loads should increase. Conversely, as the loads coming in from Lake Erie are reduced at a faster rate than those from Niagara River sources, the contribution of the FE inputs to what goes out from the River at NOTL should decrease; that is, the ratio FE/NOTL should decrease. The ratio, therefore, provides a simplified indication of the effectiveness of remedial programs in controlling the inputs of chemicals to the river.
Table 3 presents estimates of this ratio (expressed as a percent) for
1986/87 and 1996/97 for the water and suspended sediment concentrations and loads of those
chemicals noted in Table 2. It can be seen that for HCB and PCB the
ratio has increased, while for dieldrin it has decreased. Changes in this ratio (FE/NOTL)
for both concentrations and loads based on the annual calculated values from 1986 through
1997 are plotted for dieldrin, HCB, PCB and B(a)P, in the water phase, in Figures 11(a)
through (d), respectively. The trend in this ratio is evident. For dieldrin, the ratio is
clearly decreasing, indicating that inputs from Lake Erie are being reduced at a faster
rate than inputs from Niagara River sources (Williams et al 1993). Note however that the
inputs of dieldrin along the Niagara River are minor compared to the input at Fort Erie.
Although there have been some variations over time in the ratios for HCB and PCB, overall
the ratios have increased over the eleven-year period. This suggests that remedial
activities at Niagara River sources have probably been the most effective in contributing
to the reduction of the inputs of these chemicals to the river. The ratio for B(a)P has
also increased, although the data since 1991/92 are more difficult to interpret.
Figure 12 shows the recombined whole water loads (i.e., sum of water + suspended
sediments) for PCBs at FE and NOTL, and the differential load (i.e., NOTL - FE,
representing the PCB inputs in the Niagara River). The data corroborate what is stated
above for the water phase using the ratio approach. Up until 1990/91, the decreasing loads
at NOTL are due to decreasing inputs to the river from Lake Erie (note the similarity in
the decreasing slopes of the trend lines). After 1990/91, however, the PCB load measured
at NOTL decreases faster than the load to the river from Lake Erie as measured at FE (note
the slope of the NOTL trend line decreases faster than that for FE). This results in a
decrease in the differential load, and is indicative of successes at Niagara River sources
in reducing the inputs of PCBs to the river. 2.3
A PERSPECTIVE ON THE
YEARLY DATA
Figure 13 shows the concentration of octachlorostyrene (OCS) on suspended sediments at NOTL (measurements of OCS started in 1989). Because this chemical is detected only at NOTL and not at FE, it can be inferred that the major sources are located along the Niagara River rather than Lake Erie. Post-1990, OCS exhibits a reduction in concentrations and in both the number and magnitude of the spikes. Post-1992, it is generally detected less frequently. Although the levels of OCS are still less than those observed over the period 1989-1990, there is some indication that the number and magnitude of the spikes may be increasing. These observations suggest a reduction of inputs to the river and better control of sources which begin around 1991. However, following this period, the spikes may reflect an increase in the inputs on an intermittent basis.
Concentrations of hexachlorobenzene (HCB) at NOTL have consistently been much higher than concentrations at FE, indicating significant sources along the Niagara River. Figure 14 shows the suspended sediment data for hexachlorobenzene (HCB) at NOTL. The data show much the same pattern as discussed above for OCS. Between 1986 and 1992, there is a reduction in overall concentrations as well as the number and magnitude of the spikes. Occasional spike concentrations again occur in 1993 and 1995, but are not evident in the other years. Once again, these observations suggest a reduction of inputs to the river and better control of sources beginning around 1990 and 1991. However, continued monitoring will be necessary to establish whether the spikes in later years reflect a continuing pattern in contaminant concentrations and inputs. Figures 15, 16 and 17 show the water concentration data for OCS, HCBD and total chlorobenzenes, respectively, at NOTL. The data clearly show that something happened to cause an increase in the water concentrations of these toxic chemicals at the end of 1989 and extending through 1990/91 similar to that for OCS and HCB on suspended sediments. Subsequent to this period, the water concentrations are again much lower.
2.4
LINK TO REMEDIAL ACTIVITY Over the last decade, the U.S. has taken various measures to reduce the pollutant flow of untreated dry weather discharge (combined sewer overflows and contaminated (groundwater) from the Falls Street Tunnel to the Niagara River. During the period, 1989 to 1993, remedial actions and results determined by DEC and EPA included:
The Upstream/Downstream Program data support the conclusion that these actions have reduced the inputs of a number of chemicals to the Niagara River. The reasons for continued occurrence of occasional spikes post-1992 have not been
determined at this time. Additional monitoring should help establish whether the spikes
will continue. 3
THE BIOMONITORING
PROGRAM Many chemicals can concentrate in the tissues of aquatic organisms and reveal the presence of contaminants that cannot otherwise be directly detected in water, because of dilution. 3.1 CAGED MUSSELS Since 1981, MOE has monitored contaminants in caged mussels (Elliptio complanata) at sites along the Niagara River every two years. The cooperative assistance of the NYSDEC has enabled mussels to be placed on the U.S. and Canadian sides of the River. The mussel biomonitoring program has been successful at identifying contaminant sources by providing information on the presence or absence of contaminants in the tissue of deployed mussels. Examples presented here, based on information collected in 1995 and prior, document a reduction of contaminants in caged mussels located in the proximity of known sources of pollution, especially some of the U.S. priority hazardous waste sites (see U.S. EPA and NYSDEC, 1998). At some sites, the reductions point to the effectiveness of remedial programs in reducing the inputs of contaminants to the Niagara River. The results also corroborate those of the Upstream/Downstream program. Detailed discussion of the 1995 survey results are presented elsewhere (Richman 1997). The most recent mussel data, from caged mussel deployments in 1997, suggest that there may be improvement in some additional areas, and some recurring problems. All these data are currently being reviewed by the Four Parties.
Bloody Run Creek and the nearby seeps which run down the face of the Niagara Gorge were historically contaminated from the Hyde Park hazardous waste site. Prior to remediation, the drainage from this site was a major source of dioxin contamination to the Niagara River (Gradient Corporation 1990). Remediation of Bloody Run Creek was completed by the Occidental Chemical Corporation (OCC) in 1994.
Figures 18 and 19 show the dioxin and furan concentrations, respectively, in mussel tissue for the period 1993 to 1995. Concentrations for the last two years were considerably lower than those reported in 1993. These data suggest that sediment removal actions along Bloody Run Creek, action to cover and contain contaminated sediment and soil at the mouth of Bloody Run Creek and on the shoreline of the Niagara River in the vicinity of the creek, together with remedial actions taken at the site, may have reduced the bioavailability of these contaminants to aquatic life in this area. Water levels fluctuate daily to maintain the operation of the hydro generating stations, thereby, routinely, submerging and then exposing the contaminated shoreline. This site will continue to be monitored in future surveys since the contaminated sediment covered during the remediation along the Niagara River shoreline and at the mouth of the creek may continue to be a source.
Figure 20 shows the concentrations of chlorobenzenes in mussels placed at the mouth of the Pettit Flume, a storm sewer which was contaminated by groundwater from the Durez hazardous waste site in North Tonawanda. The concentrations of chlorobenzenes typically found in mussels at the Pettit Flume were considerably lower in 1995 than concentrations found in previous years suggesting the positive effects of remedial actions carried out by OCC in 1994. 3.2 JUVENILE FISH Juvenile (young-of-the-year) fish, principally spottail shiners (Notropis hudsonius), have also been used in the Biomonitoring Program. These fish have limited home ranges near shore and are of known age, making them useful indicators of local, recent chemical inputs to the aquatic ecosystem. Both MOE and NYSDEC have collected and analyzed indigenous, young-of-the-year fish. MOE has collected fish from NOTL since 1975, and from several other Canadian and U.S. locations at least every other year since the early 1980s. NYSDEC has collected fish from locations on the U.S. side of the River annually between 1984 and 1987, and about every five years since. The following results are based on MOE data (Hitchin 1998). In 1996, PCB levels in juvenile fish collected at all sites in the Niagara River (with the exception of common shiners collected at Cayuga Creek) dropped below 200 ng/g for the first time.
Figure 21 shows that the concentrations of PCB in spottail shiners collected at NOTL. have decreased substantially since the 1970s. In particular, concentrations have continued to decline over the last four years (1993-1996). In 1995 and 1996, mean PCB concentrations were below the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement specific objective of 100 ng/g for the protection of fish-eating wildlife for the first time. Chlorobenzene concentrations in young-of-the-year fish collected at several sites throughout the Niagara River (Cayuga Creek, 102nd Street, Search and Rescue Station, Lewiston, Queenston, Youngstown and NOTL) in 1996 were considerably less than those measured in 1995. Reasons for the dramatic decline in chlorobenzenes in 1996 are not known at this time. Decreases in chlorobenzene concentrations in young-of-the-year fish (spottail shiners) are consistent with the declines seen in the Upstream/Downstream and the caged mussel concentrations. In 1996, as part of a supplemental biomonitoring project in Lake Ontario and the Niagara River (NYSDEC 1998), NYSDEC collected juvenile fish for contaminant monitoring (including PCBs and organochlorine pesticides) from two tributaries in the upper Niagara River (Scajaquada Creek in Buffalo and Two-Mile Creek in Tonawanda). In this project, fish were collected from upstream locations, unaffected by changing lake levels. The stations were chosen based on the potential for having elevated levels of contamination in fish tissue but (in most cases) which had not been examined previously. The intent was to determine whether upstream contaminant sources may be present in significant concentrations, and to indicate areas where further contaminant trackdown efforts may be required. The mean PCB concentration in samples of juvenile bluntnose minnow in Scajaquada Creek was the highest of all the tributaries sampled (approximately 1400 ng/g, wet weight). The sites sampled are not affected by any of the U.S. Niagara River priority hazardous waste sites. Follow-up investigations were recommended to determine the source(s) of the contamination.
4
LONG-TERM TRENDS:
SEDIMENT CORES In the fall of 1995, NYSDEC ,USEPA and Environment Canada collected sediment core
samples from the depositional area in Lake Ontario at the mouth of the Niagara River.
Analyses of the cores and data interpretation were done by NYSDEC (NYSDEC 1996). Dated
cores from this area tell the history of toxic chemical loadings to Lake Ontario from the
River, because many toxic pollutants (e.g., pesticides, PCBs) are principally conveyed
through waterways attached to suspended sediments. Every few centimeters along the length
of the core were analysed separately to determine the concentrations of toxic chemicals on
deposits from the particular time frame represented by that segment. Radioisotope dating
was used to determine the approximate years during which the sediments were deposited.
These sediment cores put the trends of the last ten years into a long-term context. Figure 22 a-d. Concentrations of dioxin (2,3,7,8 TCDD, hexachlorobenzene, benzo(a)pyrene, and mirex in a sediment core collected from the depositional area in Lake Ontario at the mouth of the Niagara River, September 28, 1995. Approximate years of deposition are shown (1980, 1970, 1960). Persaud's LEL shown where applicable.
Results for dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD), hexachlorobenzene, benzo(a)pyrene, and mirex are shown in Figures 22 (a) through (d). The depth from the surface is shown on the left of the graph. The corresponding approximate time frame of deposition is also shown. These data indicate that the burden of toxic chemicals associated with suspended sediment coming from the River has declined significantly. The most dramatic declines occurred between 1960 and 1980, with the exception of HCB, which shows mixed results from 1970 to the present, and benzo(a)pyrene, which has exhibited a more steady decline over the period represented in the core. Similar results were observed for all priority toxic chemicals analysed. The graphs also show a line entitled "Persaud’s LEL (Lowest Effect Level)", [i.e., formally Ontario’s Provincial Sediment Quality Guideline LEL (Persaud et al. 1993)] which is the concentration at which a contaminant can be expected to begin to affect aquatic organisms. This set of guidelines is the most complete, and in most cases the most rigorous, for toxic chemicals in sediment. The sediment concentrations of the priority chemicals in the 1960s and 1970s were above the LELs. However, as the Upstream/Downstream sampling has shown, suspended sediments flowing through the Niagara River are becoming cleaner and cleaner. The older contaminated sediments in this depositional area are being buried by the new, cleaner sediments so that the surface concentrations of all priority chemicals in these cores, with the exception of DDE and PCB congeners, are now less than the LELs.
5
CURRENT CONCERNS DUE TO
TOXIC CHEMICALS Despite the progress in reducing toxic chemical inputs to the Niagara River, there are continuing concerns. For example, some toxic chemicals continue to exceed the most stringent government water quality criteria, and advisories on consumption of sportfish due to toxic chemical contamination continue. While the following discussion may not necessarily address all the current concerns, it suggests the need to continue the program to reduce inputs of toxic chemicals to the River. Six of the eighteen NRTMP priority toxic chemicals (Table 1) have also been designated as "Critical Pollutants" in the Lake Ontario Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP). That is, they are causing, or likely to cause, lake-wide impairments to "beneficial uses" in the lake (Table 4). Thus, as Niagara River sources of these chemicals continue to be reduced, Lake Ontario will also benefit.
New York State and Ontario issue advice regarding consumption of sportfish caught in their waters. In the Niagara River, New York State has issued advisories on the consumption of certain species of sport fish, based on contamination by PCBs, mirex and dioxin (NYSDOH 1998). The 1998/1999 New York State advisories for the Niagara River are summarized in Table 5. These advisories are unchanged from the 1997/1998 advisories.
The Ontario MOE issues advice contained in a biannual "Guide to Eating Sport Fish". Consumption advice on a total of 18 species of fish from two locations on the Niagara River is included in the guide. The consumption advice is based on health protection guidelines developed by Health Canada. Table 6 is taken from the 1999/2000 guide (MOE 1999). The 1999 consumption tables show less restrictive consumption advice for chinook salmon, rainbow trout and lake trout than the 1997/1998 guide. Elevated concentrations of mercury, PCBs, and mirex continue to be the major causes of consumption advisories for the sport fish found in the Niagara River.
The 1996/1997 Upstream/Downstream Monitoring Program (NRDIG 1999) identifies a number of NRTMP priority toxic chemicals that are still exceeding the most stringent government water quality criteria in the Niagara River (Table 7). The Upstream/Downstream Monitoring Program has identified some additional chemicals, for example several polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds, that are also exceeding the water quality criteria. The 1996/1997 Upstream/Downstream Monitoring Program has also identified a number of chemicals for which the loading in 1996/1997 was higher at NOTL than at FE in the water and/or suspended solids phase, indicating that Niagara River sources remain. Several of the NRTMP priority toxic chemicals are among those identified, including all the chemicals in Table 7. Additional indications of continuing sources to the Niagara River may be found through contaminant biomonitoring and source trackdown programs. For example, note the discussion regarding PCB contamination in juvenile fish. While Niagara River sources remain, the loadings of some of the chemicals at Fort Erie, representing the input to the Niagara River from upstream sources, including Lake Erie, are significant. For example, as illustrated in the last column of Table 7, the loads at FE are greater than or roughly equivalent to the differential load (i.e. NOTL-FE) for two of the six chemicals (based on recombined whole water). Thus, while a continued focus on Niagara River sources is essential, improving the River may also involve actions beyond its boundaries.
6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The Upstream/Downstream Program and the Biomonitoring Program are important, complementary programs that are key to measuring the success of the NRTMP. The Upstream/Downstream Program measures the input from Lake Erie, output to Lake Ontario, and the difference between the two. It cannot, however, reveal the sources along the river that are responsible for this difference. This is where the Biomonitoring Program is most effective. Results from applying a statistical model to the Upstream/Downstream Program data show that, with a few exceptions, there have been significant decreases in the concentrations and loads of most of the eighteen "priority toxics" over the eleven-year period between 1986 and 1997. The decreases in both the concentrations and loads for many of the eighteen chemicals exceeds 50%. For some of the eighteen chemicals, the reductions are due to the effectiveness of remedial activities in reducing inputs from Niagara River sources. This conclusion is corroborated by analysis of the Biomonitoring Program data. For example, PCB concentrations in spottail shiners collected at NOTL continue to decrease since 1993. In 1995 and 1996, concentrations were below the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement specific objective for the protection of fish eating wildlife for the first time since the Niagara River young-of-the-year fish program began. Also, based on information from 1995 and prior, concentrations of several chemicals in the tissue of mussels placed adjacent to some known sources of contamination to the river are the lowest over the period of record. Concentrations of priority toxic chemicals in cores collected from the depositional zone of the Niagara River in Lake Ontario have declined significantly. For most chemicals, the most dramatic declines occurred between 1960 and 1980. Concentrations of these chemicals in the 1960s and 1970s were above the Ontario Provincial Sediment Quality Guideline LEL (lowest effect level = LEL). However, with the older contaminated sediments in this depositional area now being buried by cleaner sediments entering the Lake from the river, surface concentrations of all priority chemicals in these cores, with the exception of DDE and PCB congeners, are now less than the LELs. Each set of data corroborates the other. All results lead to the same conclusion: remedial activities have had an effect in reducing the loads of chemicals to the river and thus, their concentrations in the river. This is the overall goal of the Niagara River Declaration of Intent and the NRTMP. Despite the successes to date, more work needs to be done. For example, several chemicals still exceed the most stringent government water quality criteria and contaminate sportfish in the River. There is evidence of continuing sources of some of these chemicals in the River. Upstream sources are important for a few of the chemicals. The Four Parties will continue to monitor progress toward reduction of chemical concentrations in the Niagara River, and to define additional actions necessary to reduce toxic chemical inputs, through the activities outlined in the 1999 Work Plan. El-Shaarawi, A.H., and A.H. Al-Ibrahim. 1996. Trend Analysis and Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Niagara River Data (1986-1994). National Water Research Institute and McMaster University, Burlington, Ontario. Gradient Corporation. 1990. Lake Ontario TCDD Bioaccumulation Study, Final Report. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, New York State Department of Health and Occidental Chemical Corporation. Hitchin, G. 1998. Contaminants in Niagara River Juvenile Fish - 1996. Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Toronto, Ontario. Summary Report. January 1998. MOE. 1999. Guide to Eating Ontario Sport Fish, 1999-2000. Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Toronto, Ontario. Niagara River Data Interpretation Group (NRDIG). 1999. Joint Evaluation of Upstream/Downstream Niagara River Monitoring Data 1996-1997. Environment Canada, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Draft Final Report, February 11, 1999. NYSDEC. 1996. Lake Ontario Sediment Survey: 1995 Sediment Coring Results. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Water, Bureau of Watershed Assessment and Research, Albany, New York. NYSDEC. 1998. Contaminants in Young-of-Year Fish from Selected Lake Ontario Tributaries. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Fish, Wildlife and Marine Resources, Albany, New York. NYSDOH. 1998. Health Advisories, Chemicals in Sportfish and Game, 1998-1999. New York State Department of Health. Revised September 1998. Persaud, D., R. Jaagumagi, and A. Hayton. 1993. Guidelines for the Protection and Management off Aquatic Sediment Quality in Ontario. Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Toronto, Ontario. Richman, L. 1997. Niagara River Mussel Biomonitoring Program, 1995. Surface Water Section, Environmental Monitoring and Reporting Branch, Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Toronto, Ontario. Final Report, November 1997. Williams, D.J., K.W. Kuntz, and A.H. El-Shaarawi. 1992. The Niagara River, Lake Ontario and the Niagara River Toxics Management Plan (NRTMP). Williams, D.J., K.W. Kuntz, M. Neilson, F. Philbert, V. Glumac, L. Richman, and K. Suns. 1993. The Niagara River Toxics Management Plan: An Approach to Measure and Communicate Progress. U.S. EPA and NYSDEC. 1998. Reduction of Toxics Loadings to the Niagara River from Hazardous Waste Sites in the United States: November 1998. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region 2, New York, NY. WORK PLAN
NOTES Note A. Report on U.S. Point Sources DEC regularly monitors a suite of EPA priority pollutants in point sources as part of its State Permit Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) requirements. Of the 29 most significant point sources of toxic pollutants existing in 1986, 26 dischargers are still operating. New York reported an 80% drop in priority pollutants from its 29 significant point sources between 1981 and 1985. New York also reported a drop of 25% in the remaining load of "priority pollutants" between 1985 and 1994. Note B. Report on Canadian Point Sources In November 1996, MOE released a final report on NRTMP-specific monitoring of its point sources on the Niagara River. From 1986 to 1995, MOE has seen an estimated 99% reduction in loadings of the 18 chemicals of concern (COC). Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) have been set for 14 of the 18 COCs. Since 1993, effluent quality from these point sources has met all 14 PWQOs. This means that end-of-pipe concentrations are acceptable against the Standards that Ontario has set for all surface waters in the Province. As a result, MOE has discontinued NRTMP-specific monitoring of the Niagara River and focused resources towards Ontario’s biomonitoring program on the River. Regulatory monitoring and reporting of Ontario point sources required by Certificates of Approval and Clean Water regulations will continue. Note C. Remediate Occidental Chemical-Buffalo Ave site Additional enhancements to the overburden groundwater collection system, including a tile drain, were completed by December 1998. Additional enhancements to the bedrock groundwater collection system (enhancement of the treatment plant) were also completed in December 1998. These enhancements are discussed in the November 1998 EPA/DEC Hazardous Waste Site Remediation Progress Report (see References). Full operation of the collection systems has begun, effectively eliminating future off-site loadings. A site-wide Corrective Measures Study (CMS), addressing all on-site and off-site remedial measures, was submitted in November 1998 and approved in March 1999. Additional measures beyond the continued operation of the existing interim corrective measures (ICMs) are not indicated in the CMS report. Public notice of the Draft Permit is expected in April 1999. Note D: Remediate Hyde Park site. Most site construction is complete. All of the overburden groundwater is being contained, and in the three bedrock groundwater zones, at least 80% of contaminated groundwater is being contained. Remedial work to achieve full containment is continuing. Note E: Remediate Occidental Chemical S-area site. Operation of the drain collection system for the landfill portion of the site began in 1996. However, a portion of the system is not functioning as designed due to collapse of the drain pipe in several areas. EPA and DEC have determined that the damaged system must be replaced and are assessing what actions are necessary to do so. EPA anticipates that this problem will delay completion of the Remedial Action by approximately one year, until 2000. The final landfill cap is scheduled for construction in 1999, but will be delayed to correct the damaged drain collection system. Note F: Remediate Buffalo Color Corporation site. A supplemental investigation involving the collection of six additional soil samples was conducted and a Revised RFI Report was submitted in November 1997. A second supplemental investigation was conducted during the summer of 1998 in response to NYSDEC comments on the Revised RFI Report. The investigation included eight new wells, ten additional soil samples and other work. A Revised RFI Report was submitted December 1998 and was approved in March 1999. A site-wide CMS Work Plan will be submitted in May 1999. A Draft Interim Corrective Measures Study for Plant Area A is to be submitted in April 1999. The objective of the ICM is to establish hydraulic control of groundwater in this area and prevent any discharge of contaminated groundwater to the Buffalo River. Note G: Remediate Bethlehem Steel Site BSC has completed the field work for the site investigation, and is preparing RFI and human health risk assessment reports. These have been delayed due to negotiations over the scope. Approval is anticipated by April 2000. BSC completed limited remedial technology studies for two areas that are the primary sources of groundwater contamination at the facility (the Acid Tar Pits and Coke Oven Areas). However, EPA and DEC found the studies to have major technical flaws. A comprehensive Corrective Measures Study will commence after RFI approval. All CMS and Corrective Measure Implementation will be performed pursuant to a subsequent order or permit. A two-year delay is anticipated for CMI start-up (December 2002). Note H: Remediate River Road and Niagara Mohawk Cherry Farm Site Removal of sediment from the Niagara River was completed in late 1998. All remedial work is complete except for final capping of the sediment disposal area. Also note that the remedy was revised to include fish and wildlife habitat enhancements through the creation of shoreline wetland embayments in the river. Note J: Remediate Gratwick Riverside Park Site Remedial Design (RD) started in early 1996. The design includes shoreline protection, hydraulic barrier between site and river, a cap over the site to allow it to be used as a park, and collection of contaminated groundwater. During design, some site-related contamination was found in river sediments. It was also determined that steps should be taken to improve the habitat value of the shoreline area. Design changes to address these issues were submitted for approval in a proposed ROD amendment, released in September 1998. Remedial construction is expected to begin in mid- 1999. Note K: Remediate Occidental Chemical Durez - North Tonawanda Site The remediation of this site was completed in 1994. The remedial action included construction of a ground water interceptor trench around the plant perimeter to collect groundwater for treatment at an on-site carbon treatment system; removal of contaminated sediments in 22,000 linear feet of sewers off site; and remediation of Pettit Creek Cove, including sediment and soil removal at the cove, pumping of DNAPL; and dredging of the Little Niagara River. Note L: Determine whether trace amounts of contaminants of concern found at 5 landfills are moving to groundwater off-site. During the Niagara River Toxics Committee Study (1981-84), four industrial and one municipal landfills were identified as having the potential to contribute contaminants to the River. Studies conducted in 1991 and 1993 showed that the landfills have minimal to no impact on the River. Groundwater monitoring at these sites has shown that contaminants are not moving to the groundwater and off-site. Further assessment is not required at this time. Regulatory monitoring and reporting of these non-point sources as required by certificates of approval will continue. Note M: Collect juvenile spottail shiners or other juvenile fish and analyze for toxic chemicals according to Monitoring Plan In 1997 and 1998, spottail shiner capture in the Niagara River was poor despite efforts of MOE and DEC on the Canadian and U.S. sides of the River. MOE collected emerald shiners as an alternate species at three locations in 1997 including Queenston, Lewiston, and Niagara-on-the-Lake. Technical summaries are currently in preparation. MOE collected juvenile fish from eight locations on both the Canadian and U.S. side of the Niagara River in 1998. The Canadian locations included Fort Erie (spottail shiners), Queenston (common shiners), and Niagara-on-the-Lake (spottail shiners). The U.S. locations included Wheatfield (common shiners), 102nd Street (common shiners), Cayuga Creek (common and spottail shiners), Search and Rescue (emerald shiners) and Lewiston (emerald shiners). In 1997, DEC completed collections of spottail shiners and other young-of-the-year fish at 35 stations throughout the Great Lakes basin in New York State, including 14 stations in the Niagara River basin. Analysis was expanded to include PCB congeners and dioxin and furans at several stations. A report is in preparation. Note N: Track down toxic chemicals in tributaries and sewer systems to identify sources There is evidence of continuing sources of some of the NRTMP priority toxic chemicals in the Niagara River and its tributaries. Trackdown is a key program to identify the sources. DEC and EPA are forming a work group to oversee the implementation of New York State Great Lakes basin source trackdown work, including Lake Ontario, the Niagara River and Lake Erie. Much relevant information has been collected over the past several years. The assessment is to assemble the existing trackdown related information, describe the source contol actions completed to date or on-going, and describe the next steps, including additional source control actions and monitoring. Additional follow-up actions in the Niagara River and tributaries will start in 2000 upon completion of the assessment, or sooner as priorities are identified. Note O: Biomonitor using caged mussels and analyze for toxic chemicals, according to Monitoring Plan Since 1981, MOE, with the cooperation of DEC, has conducted routine and specialized biomonitoring of contaminants in the Niagara River using caged mussels. Studies have been conducted on both the Canadian and U.S. sides of the River. These studies have provided information on suspected contaminant sources and source areas, as well as information on the effectiveness of site remediations in reducing contaminants in the River between Fort Erie and Niagara-on-the-Lake. In 1995, two complementary studies were initiated by MOE: (1) the routine deployment of caged mussels at 21 stations on the Canadian and U.S. sides of the river for 21 days of exposure; and (2) a long term deployment, for up to four months, at two stations. Mussels were retrieved after the designated period of deployment and the tissues were analyzed for pesticides, PCBs, chlorinated benzenes, PAHs, dioxins, and furans. The results of the studies are discussed in the Progress Report, and the full report is available through the MOE, Richman, L. 1998. Niagara River Mussel Biomonitoring Program, 1995. In 1997, Mussels were deployed at 32 stations for 21 days and at four stations for up to four months. Mussel tissue has been analyzed for chlorobenzenes, total PCBs, and organochlorine pesticides and PAHs. A technical summary was recently completed. Note P: Develop additional materials relating information on Niagara River contamination and contaminant sources. The goal of the December 1996 NRTMP Letter of Support is
Though NRTMP has made much progress toward this goal, more work is needed to determine what additional actions are necessary to improve water quality and reduce contamination of sediments, fish and wildlife. The task is to examine a variety of information sources on toxic contamination in the River water, biota, and sediments, toward the following objectives:
Key sources of information for the synthesis include: (1) Upstream/Downstream monitoring; (2) contaminant biomonitoring; (2) sportfish advisories and contamination; (5) contaminant source trackdown monitoring; (5) sediment quality data; (6) waste site contaminant loadings; (7) point source contaminant loadings. The effort to develop the synthesis is underway. Additional information will be incorporated into the NRTMP Progress Report and Work Plan beginning in 2000. Note Q: Make NRTMP information and reports available on the Internet. Upstream/Downstream Reports for 1992/93 and 1993/94 are on GLIMR Internet site (http://glimr.cciw.ca/). The November 1998 U.S. Niagara River hazardous waste site remediation progress report is at http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/lakeont/nrtmp/report.html. Additional reports will be added as they are available. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
