I
E
Ayu
                 --tates
                 Cental Protection
Great Lakes National
Program Office
536 South Clark Street
Chicago, Illinois 60605
EPA-905/9-85-002
August 1985
                                                C.I
oEPA
Five Year Program
Strategy for Great Lakes
National Program
1986-1990


-------
                                                 EPA-905/9-85-002
                                                 August 1985
      A FIVE YEAR PROGRAM STRATEGY

                 FOR THE

     GREAT LAKES NATIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE

                  OF THE

   U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

                 1986 - 1990
                                 .,  '   : .  : r-anental Protection Agency
                                 luv::-,    . ...'>rary (5PL-16)
                                 2.30  B.  ,  _ born Street, Room 1670
                                 Chicago. IL   60604
Greal Lakes National Program Report #85-01
   Great Lakes National Program Office
   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
          536 South Clark Street
         Chicago, Illinois 60604
               June, 1985

-------
                          TABLE OF CONTENTS
                                                            Page
   I.  Introduction                                           1
  II.  Mission Statement for the Great Lakes
       National Program Office                                4
 III.  The Great Lakes Ecosystem                              6
  IV.  Remaining Great Lakes Problems                        10
   V.  Nonpoint Sources of Conventional Pollutants           13
  VI.  The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement               19
 VII.  United States Programs                                23
VIII.  A Five Year Program Strategy for the Great Lakes      33
       References                                            49

-------
                             I.  INTRODUCTION

     This document  lays  out a five year program strategy  for  the  Great
Lakes National  Program Office of the  Environmental  Protection Agency
(EPA).  This office coordinates  with  other EPA programs and with  other
agencies to support activities that  benefit the Great  Lakes and assist
implementation  of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement with Canada.

     The program strategy has two purposes.  One is to inform other EPA
programs, federal agencies and the  states how the Great Lakes Office  will
address its longterm goals from 1986  to 1990.  The other  is to assist
efficient use of resources and annual  budgeting by setting program
priorities.

     The goals  of the five year program strategy for the  Great Lakes  are:

     1.  To apply an ecosystem approach to management  by  considering
         effects of use  of the lakes  on the health of  biota and human
         health;

     2.  To obtain  sufficient information about sources,  fates and
         effects of toxic contaminants to support a mass  balance  approach
         in remedial programs;

     3.  To develop and  implement remedial programs in all areas  of
         concern;

     4.  To evaluate results of remedial programs for  conventional
         pollutants, including phosphorus controls, and to determine
         whether more stringent controls are  needed; and

     5.  To develop a stronger partnership with Great  Lake states,
         other EPA  programs and other federal agencies for implement-
         ation of the Great Lakes Agreement with Canada.

     The Great Lakes are North America's largest reservoir of fresh sur-
face water.  The size and nature of this system provides  a sensitive
laboratory for detecting environmental problems and testing possible
solutions.  The earlier cooperative process for reducing  phosphorus
loadings is now underway for control  of toxic contamination.   The five
year strategy provides for continued monitoring of responses  to phosphorus
controls but emphasizes  control of  toxic contamination as the measure now
needed to protect beneficial uses of the lakes for the future.

     The Great Lakes Water Quality  Agreement  with Canada  provides a bi-
national framework  for Great Lakes  management and assigns oversight
responsibility to the International  Joint Commission (IJC).  The  IJC
relies on its Water Quality Board for reports on progress but implement-
ation of the agreement depends on national programs.  Since EPA is the
lead agency for fulfilling agreement obligations on the U.S.  side, the

-------
Great Lakes Office provides staff support to the Water Quality Board and
coordinates participation by EPA and other agencies in the IJC activi-
ties for the Great Lakes agreement.

     The Great Lakes Office is located in Region V of the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency in Chicago but also works with Region II in New
York and Region III in Philadelphia to integrate Great Lakes cleanup with
EPA's other mandates for environmental protection.   Within EPA, the
Great Lakes Office coordinates its activities with the programs for
water, environmental services, hazardous wastes and toxic substances, and
air as well as does the Central Regional Laboratory and EPA research
units.  The Great Lakes Office also assists coordination of state programs
and cooperates with other federal agencies.

     The strategy described here assumes five stages in development of
environmental solutions:

     1.  Identification of problems;

     2.  Quantification and determination of significance of effects;

     3.  Proposal  and testing of solutions;

     4.  Implementation of remedial  programs; and

     5.  Evaluation of results and feedback to remedial programs.

     Evaluation will lead to needed modification of programs.   Therefore,
the strategy will  be reviewed and updated as required by changes in
understanding of problems, evaluation of results of control  efforts or
other events.

     Achievement of all the objectives and completion of all  the activities
outlined in Chapter VII depends in part on the availability of funding.  Yet,
articulation of the strategy will assist setting priorities if there is not
enough funding available to carry out the full program on the schedule that
is outlined here.   If necessary, because of lack of resources, implement-
ation can be extended over a longer period.

     In summary, the strategy is based on the current status of progress
in addressing Great Lakes problems and considers the further progress
that can be made in addressing them over the next five years.   It sets
priorities for action and lays out specific activities for the Great Lakes
National  Program Office year by year from 1986 to 1990.  The strategy
provides that the Great Lakes Office will assist achievement of an eco-
system approach by integration of multimedia efforts for the Great Lakes
within EPA as well as by coordination with other federal agencies and the
states.

-------
     The strategy also considers the ecosystem approach  to management
called for in the 1978 Great Lakes  agreement.   While  the program strategy
is most concerned with cleanup and  prevention  of pollution of waters  of
the Great Lakes themselves,  an ecosystem perspective  requires attention
to the tributaries, to land  and to  the atmosphere as  sources  of contamina-
tion to the lakes.  The strategy considers  human health  because an  eco-
system approach is concerned with human uses  of the lakes as  well as  the
ecological integrity of natural systems.

     Finally, the strategy assumes  that public support depends on public
understanding of the environmental  problems that affect  the Great Lakes.
Therefore the strategy includes public information and education as a
necessary component of long  term efforts to clean up  pollution from the
past and to prevent continued environmental damage in the future.

-------
      II.  MISSION STATEMENT FOR THE GREAT LAKES NATIONAL PROGRAM OFFICE

      The mission of the Great Lakes National Program Office includes two
chief functions.  The first is to take the lead in ensuring fulfillment
of United States obligations under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agree-
ment  with Canada.  The second is to assist EPA's management of the Great
Lakes under national laws and policies.  Both purposes require integration
of the activities of the Great Lakes Program Office with EPA's funding
and regulatory programs, including the programs that have been delegated
to the states.

      The Great Lakes National Program Office is administered within the
Region V office of EPA because this region includes six of the eight
Great Lake states (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan and
Ohio).  The office also provides leadership, assistance and coordination
on Great Lakes issues to the EPA Region II office in New York and the
Region III office in Pennsylvania.

      The international  Great Lakes agreement requires remedial programs,
research, surveillance and monitoring.  Remedial actions are accomplished
entirely by the separate national  programs of each country.  U.S.
policy requires delegation to the states of as much responsibility for
implementation of federal  environmental  programs as possible.  For this
reason, the Great Lakes office works with other EPA program offices to
promote attention by the states to Great Lakes needs.

      In EPA, the Water Divisions have the primary responsibility for
regulatory and remedial  programs under the Clean Water Act.  Great Lakes
issues are considered in review of grants to the states for administration
of permits under the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPUES),
for implementation of the construction grants program for municipal sewage
treatment systems, for setting and enforcement of water quality standards
and for planning.

     An ecosystem perspective in control  of toxic contamination also
requires cooperation between the Great Lakes Office and the offices
responsible for hazardous waste management, drinking water and air quality.
The Great Lakes Office will  work with these offices to integrate Great
Lakes concerns into their programs.

      Under the international agreement, surveillance and monitoring and
some  research are accomplished by coordination and cooperation with
Canadian agencies and with other federal  and state agencies through the
IJC.  The staff of the Great Lakes Office serves on 1JC boards, committees
and task forces that plan, carry out and report on activities related
to the Great Lakes agreement.  It also provides staff services to the
regional administrator of Region V, who traditionally serves as the
U.S.  Chairman of the IJC Water Quality Board.

-------
     The research responsibilities of the Great Lakes Office include
identifying Great Lakes research needs for Region V, for the Office of
Research and Development (ORD) in EPA headquarters and for the agency's
national laboratories.   The Great Lakes Office often funds needed research
within EPA and cooperates with other federal  agencies in identifying
and supporting research.  The office contracts directly with universities
and private consultants for research as needed.

     In addition to its oversight and coordinating functions for remedial
programs and research,  the Great Lakes Office carries out EPA's Great
Lakes surveillance and  monitoring program.  The lake surveillance program
is required under the Great Lakes agreement.   The program includes funding
by contract operation of the research vessel  the Roger R. Simons and the
Central Regional Laboratory in Region V.  It  also requires coordination
with the states, with other federal  agencies  and with Canadian agencies.
The surveillance program is the chief operating activity of the Great
Lakes Office and absorbs the majority of its  budget.

     Finally, the Great Lakes Office operates the Great Lakes Demonstration
Grant Program under Section 108 of the Clean  Water Act.  The program is
authorized to show the  feasibility of using innovative methods of con-
trolling pollution of the Great Lakes.  The Lake Surveillance Program and
the Section 108 Demonstration Grant Program are the only EPA field programs
operated by the Great Lakes National Program  Office.

-------
                     III.  THE GREAT LAKES ECOSYSTEM
     The Great Lakes system is the largest reservoir of fresh surface water
on North America and contains about 20 percent of the world's supply.  The
Great Lakes are a fishery resource, a transportation system, a water supply,
a recreation resource, a modifier of climate and a means of waste disposal.
In both Canada and the United States, all of these uses contributed to
development of one of the world's largest inland concentrations of
population and industry.

     The Great Lakes are being looked to as a basis for rebuilding the
regional economy.  Yet the physical, chemical and biological change and
degradation of water quality that accompanied past development must be
avoided in order to sustain development in the region in the future.

     New understanding about the Great Lakes has been gained with ex-
perience in cleanup of the lakes under domestic laws and the Great
Lakes agreement with Canada.  This experience has led to a new concept
of need for an ecosystem approach to management.  The ecosystem per-
spective requires management of the Great Lakes as an integrated system
of land, air and water, inhabited by humans and other organisms.  It
also requires understanding of how the natural  system has changed in the
past 200 years and helps to predict future changes.

                     CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NATURAL SYSTEM

     The Great Lakes system flows from Lake Superior 600 feet above sea
level through the other four lakes and the connecting channels out
through the St.  Lawrence River to the Atlantic Ocean.  The system
contains five distinct drainage basins but the land area is relatively
small in relation to the large and numerous bodies of waters.  One-third
of the total  300,000 square mile drainage basin is covered by water.
Another feature is the numerous tributaries that drain a large variety
of land uses  and many types of soil.  The hydrologic features of the
five lakes are compared below.
           COMPARATIVE HYDROLOGIC FEATURES OF THE FIVE GREAT LAKES
Lake
Drainage Area,
Square Miles
Superior    49,300
Michigan    45,600
Huron
Erie
Ontario
  51,700
  22,700
  27,300
Surface Area,
Square Miles

 31,700


 22,300


 23,000


  9,910


  7,340
Volume,     Residence    Depth,
Cubic Miles Time, Years  Feet
 2,935


 1,180


   849


   116


   393
200        489 average
         1,335 maximum

100         279 average
            925 maximum

 25         195 average
            750 maximum

 3           62 average
            210 maximum

 6          283 average
            802 maximum

-------
     Less than one percent of the total  volume of water in the system
flows out the St. Lawrence each year.  The relatively closed nature of
the system makes the Great Lakes more vulnerable to pollution while the
huge volume of water makes reversal  of change due to pollution more
difficult.

     The response to pollution and cleanup is different in each lake.
Lake Erie is the shallowest, its shores  are highly urbanized and its
major tributaries drain intensely farmed cornbelt soils.   For these
reasons, Lake Erie was the first to show lakewide signs of cultural
eutrophication but also responded more quickly to cleanup.

     Lake Ontario is smaller in area but deeper than Erie.  Being down-
stream, it receives nutrients from Erie  and probably receives persistent
toxicants from the rest of the system as well as the Niagara River.
Ontario has the highest concentrations of toxic contaminants.

     Lake Michigan's vulnerability to both overenrichment  and toxic con-
tamination is compounded by a long residence time of about 100 years.  It
receives high loadings of nutrients, heavy metals and contaminants from
the atmosphere over its large surface area.  Chloride levels are several
times higher in this lake than at the turn of~"tKe century.

     Lake Superior and Lake Huron are the Upper Great Lakes whose drain-
age basins have lower population densities and more forested lands.
Maintenance of Superior's pristine,  oligotrophic state is  an objective of
the water quality agreement.  In Huron,  as throughout the  entire Great
Lakes system, nearshore waters and embayments are more eutrophic and have
higher contaminant levels than the open  lake.  Such areas  are enclosed,
shallow and also receive more concentrated loadings of pollutants, with
less circulation than the open lakes.

     The levels and flows of the system  are governed more  by the natural
hydrologic cycle than by existing manmade diversions and  regulation for
navigation and hydropower production.  The Army Corps of  Engineers has
found that the net cumulative change in  lake levels due to operation of
control locks and to diversions since 1909 is only a few  inches.  A 1981
IJC study suggested the possibility, however, of potential  consumptive
uses over the next 50 years that could reduce the flow out the St. Lawrence
by as much as 8 percent over the next century.   The resulting change in
lake levels could affect wetlands as well  as other uses of the lakes.
There is also concern about possible ecological  consequences of potential
new major interbasin transfers in the future.

     The average annual precipitation over the  entire Great Lakes basin
is 31  inches.  There is approximately 10 percent greater precipitation
over the Great Lakes than over the surrounding  land.  Both wet and dry
deposition of airborne toxic substances  are significant sources to the
lakes, which serve as a sink for polychlorinated biphenyls  (PCBs) and
other contaminants from many sources.

-------
                     WATER QUALITY IN THE GREAT LAKES SYSTEM

     Concerns about water quality in the Great Lakes have passed through
four general stages dealing with disease organisms, oxygen depletion,
nutrients and eutrophication and now toxic contamination as the cause of
pollution.  Appreciation for the complexity of the causes of water quality
degradation in the Great Lakes has grown with experience in monitoring
responses to pollution control measures over the past 20 years.

     Before intensive settlement and development of the region, the waters
of the Great Lakes were clear and cold throughout the system.  Algae
growth was low and there were many species of fish, some of which are now
extinct.  The average size of individual fish was much larger and longer-
lived species such as sturgeon and lake trout were abundant.  It is
difficult to distinguish the causes of the drastic changes in the fishery
between accidental and deliberate introduction of exotic species, over-
fishing and habitat changes.  An ecosystem approach to management assumes,
however, a link between the health of natural biota and habitat.

     As cities grew, local degradation due to waste disposal at first
seemed inconsequential in the large lakes.  Later it was realized that
fundamental change in such a large system may not become obvious until it
is well-advanced.  By the 1880s, contamination of drinking water intakes
by human sewage led to primary treatment and disinfection of sewage.

     With better treatment of drinking water, sewage treatment solved the
disease problem through the first half of the 20th century except for
diseases contracted by swimming.  Even with primary treatment for sewage,
however, overenrichment by organic wastes from many sources was causing
subtle change in life in the lakes in many locations through the first half
of this century.  Beaches were closed to swimming because of high fecal
coliform counts or were unused because of algae, odors, floating oil or
dead fish.

     Algae growth increased and promoted oxygen depletion and destruction
of biota in nearshore and estuary areas.  How such changes could affect a
whole Great Lake was not recognized until eutrophication became obvious
in vulnerable Lake Erie.  By 1960, changes in productivity and the annual
cycle of algae bloom, decay and oxygen depletion in Lake Erie had been
linked to overenrichment.  The public demanded pollution control and the
federal government promoted secondary treatment of sewage and control of
direct discharges of industrial wastes.

     After scientific consensus was reached that phosphorus is the limit-
ing nutrient for the Great Lakes, reduction of phosphorus became the
chief objective of the first Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement with
Canada in 1972.   In the same year, Congress adopted the 1972 Federal
Water Pollution Control Act amendments  (PL 92-500).  This legislation
provides the chief vehicle for  fulfilling U.S. obligations under the
binational compact.

-------
     By 1980, decreased algae growth  and  increased  dissolved  oxygen
levels were evidence that  water quality is  improved in  most of  the Great
Lakes.  Today, although acceleration  of eutrophication  appears  to have
been controlled in the open  lakes  by  reduction  of phosphorus  loadings,
toxic contamination is considered  a long  term threat to sensitive uses  of
the lakes.  Remaining Great  Lakes  problems  are  described in Section  IV.

-------
                                                                        10
                   IV.  REMAINING GREAT LAKES PROBLEMS

     To date, substantial  progress has been made in controlling overen-
richment by nutrients and in reducing other forms of Great Lakes pollution.
Two major categories of problems remain:  impairment of beneficial  uses
in numerous geographic locations that the IJC identifies as "areas  of
concern" and accumulation of toxic contamination throughout the system.

     Although water quality in the Great Lakes has improved from many
standpoints in recent decades, the IJC has identified 28 areas of concern
in the United States where beneficial uses are impaired.  In these
locations, even though there may be less pollution than formerly, the
water quality objectives of the Great Lakes agreement and federal and
state pollution control requirements are not being met.  The areas  of
concern are shown on the map on page 9.

     The conventional pollutants that remain a problem in areas of  concern
are in addition to the toxic contamination that are believed to be  a threat
to biota and potentially to human health throughout the system.  Progress
toward control of toxic contamination currently is at an early stage in
the process that begins with recognition of the problem.  Reduction of
conventional pollution is at an advanced stage where results can be
measured and controls refined.

                            CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS

     Lower dissolved solids, reduced biochemical oxygen demand and  less
algae growth in many Great Lakes locations are believed to reflect  greater
control of conventional pollutants, especially from direct discharges.
How this control has been achieved in U.S. programs is discussed in
Section VI.  Full attainment of the objectives for phosphorus reduction
called for in the Great Lakes agreement will require further control of
land runoff.

                    POINT SOURCES OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS

     Target loadings of phosphorus have been achieved for the open lakes
in Huron and Michigan with reduced direct discharges of wastes from
industry and municipal sources, detergent phosphate bans and nonpoint
source controls.  Monitoring will continue to determine how the reductions
in nutrient levels affect productivity.

     Results of productivity monitoring as well as monitoring of water
chemistry and mass balance modeling will help determine whether current
controls are sufficient to maintain water quality in Lake Superior and to
enhance conditions in Huron and Michigan.  The need for stricter controls
in these lakes depends on whether the  biota are protected by current
target  limits of conventional pollutants, including phosphorus.

-------
                                                                        11
     For Lakes Erie and Ontario and  Saginaw  Bay  in  Lake  Huron,  further
efforts are needed to meet  the  target  loadings that  are  specified  in
plans being completed in 1985.   All  municipal sewage treatment  systems
will need to meet the 1  mg/1  effluent  limit  required for phosphorus under
the Great Lakes agreement.   Within the next  five years,  monitoring will
determine where stricter limits are  needed to meet  the target loads for
phosphorus as major permits are revised.

-------
                                                             AREAS  OF  CONCERN IN THE GREAT LAKES BASIN
                        GRAND CALUMET RIVER AND     RAISIN R. •l' \
                          INDIANA HARBOR SHIP            1 *-   n   /
                                         MAUMEER.          ''
WAUKEGAN HARBOR

-------
                                                                         13
                  NONPOINT SOURCES OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS

     Most areas of concern are in nearshore and estuary areas near the
mouths of tributaries and most are also near major metropolitan con-
centrations of population.  Combined sewer overflows are a major problem
in many locations such as the Grand Calumet area at the south end of Lake
Michigan.  Reduction of pollution from this source will require innovative
technologies and investigation of what can be achieved by best management
practices.

     Agricultural runoff has been reduced by use of alternative low tillage
techniques in some locations such as the ftaumee River basin in Ohio but
further reductions are needed there and elsewhere.  The Great Lakes
Office will continue to track use of conservation tillage techniques and to
seek ways to reduce loadings to the Great Lakes by reduction of land
runoff.

                               TOXIC CONTAMINATION

     Contamination by toxic chemicals and heavy metals is a major but less
obvious change in water quality.  In 1985, the sources and role of toxic
contaminants are not understood well enough to determine whether current
laws and environmental programs will be adequate for cleanup.  Research
on sources and fates and effects as well as mass balance modeling is needed
to assist development of remedial programs for toxic contamination.

     Great Lakes toxicants are many and varied.  A few, such as DDT and
mercury, have been successfully controlled after their effects were
identified.  PCB loadings remain high even though uses are controlled
under the Toxic Substances Control  Act of 1976 and levels have decreased
in fish in some locations.

     At present, no concentrations  of chemicals or heavy metals are found
in the lakes at levels that are known to be acutely toxic to organisms
during brief exposure.  The greatest concern is about possible long term
effects of small quantities of numerous substances through bioconcentration
and bioaccumulation and about possible additive and synergistic actions.

     Many substances have been found at levels too low to be regulated
under existing laws even though the rate of accumulation in the ecosystem
may be high.  In 1983, the Water Quality Board reported to the IJC that
900 chemicals and heavy metals potentially dangerous to human health and
the biota have been identified in the Great Lakes.  The potential  for
human exposure by fish consumption  is increased by bioconcentration and
bioaccumulation in the food chain.   Major known locations of toxic sub-
stances in the Great Lakes are shown on page 15.

-------
                                                                        14


     Concern about potential human health effects has increased with growing
evidence of links between the presence of contaminants and carcinogenicity
for fish, genetic defects in fish-eating birds, and reproductive disorders
in biota.  Further, possible links have been reported between developmental
disorders in human infants and prenatal exposure to PCBs because of consump-
tion of certain Great Lakes fish by their mothers.  The contaminants reach
the lakes by many pathways, from both point and nonpoint sources.

                       TOXICANTS FROM POINT SOURCES

     The pretreatment program of the Clean Water Act can be a major means  of
control of toxic contaminants from point sources.  Pretreatment is  required
for industrial  wastes that are discharged into municipal systems.  Without
pretreatment, sewage treatment works in nearly all areas of concern would  be
significant sources of toxic contaminants.

     Pretreatment requirements are now being adopted in many locations.   Once
biological monitoring and fate and effect research provide sufficient infor-
mation for mass balance modeling, stricter effluent limits may become neces-
sary for more toxic substances.

                         TOXICANTS FROM NONPOINT SOURCES

     It is now known that toxic substances can be released into the
environment during transport, use and disposal to reach the lakes by
many pathways.   Research in the 1970s showed that atmospheric deposition
is a major source to the lakes of organic chemicals such as PCBs and
toxaphene and of metals such as lead, zinc and cadmium.

     Atmospheric transport is believed to be the only source for some
toxic chemicals to the Upper Great Lakes, where neither direct discharges
nor land runoff can otherwise account for their presence in fish.  More
information is  needed about sources to the atmosphere, including the
role of combustion, evaporation, and volatilization, to assist development
of controls.  The lakes themselves may even contribute to atmospheric
contamination,  since evaporation of PCBs from the water surface into
the air has been reported.

     Sediments  are another potential source of both toxic chemicals and
nutrients that have settled out of the water column to become in-place
pollutants.  In many areas of concern, toxic contaminants are concentrated
in sediments that may be in relatively specific "toxic hotspots" or
dispersed over wide areas in embayments and in tributaries.  They tend
to accumulate below direct discharges of effluents with a high solid
content and may remain in place indefinitely.  Sediments become a
source of contamination when toxic substances are released by biological
action, by physical disturbance from boats or storms, or by the necessity
to dredge navigation channels for shipping.  Methods for safe removal and
disposal of contaminated sediments are urgently needed.

-------
                                                     ASHLAND - PAH's. heavy metals
                                                KEWEENAW  PENINSULA - copper mine tailing!

                                                     DE6R LAKE / CARP RIVER - mercury
                              MENOMINEE / MARINETTE - arsenic

                                    QREEN BAY - PCB's. mercury. PCOF'o

                         FOX RIVER - PCB's, mercury, chlorinated organic. PCDF's




                                                   SHEBOYQAN RIVER - PCB's,

                                MILWAUKEE - PCB'a, heavy melali. PAH's
                                     WAUKEQAN HARBOR - PCB's

            GREAT LAKES NAVAL TRAINING CENTER - heavy metals
                 INDIANA HARBOR /
                GRAND CALUMET RIVER - PCB's, heavy metals. PAH's
\
                     KALAMAZOO RIVER - PCB's
                          QRAND RIVER - heaw metals

    MUSKEOON                   MUSKEOON R.VER - PAH',
        LAKE / MONA LAKE / LITTLE BEAR CREEK - heavy metala  	
                WHITE  LAKE - PCB'a. chromium, chlorinated organlcs
\
                                                                                                            .•etf   SERPENT HARBOUR - heavy metals, DOT, radlonuclides
                                                                                                                                   SPANISH RIVER - PCB's, heavy metal*, phenols
PINE / TITTABAWASSEE / SAQINAW RIVERS - PBB's. dioxin, PCB's. PCDF's

SAQINAW BAY -  PCB'a. PCDF's, DOT

COLLINQWOOD - heavy metals. PCB'a

HAMILTON HARBOUR - PCB's. heavy metals, phenols
     ST. CATHERINES - PCB's
        TORONTO - PCB's. pesticides, dloxln, mlrex, heavy metals
                WHITBY HARBOUR - polychlorinated blphenyl ethers
                   PORT HOPE - uranium, radium, heavy metals
                     BAY OF QUINTE - mercury, dioxin, PCP
                         MOIRA RIVER - heavy metala
                                                                                                                                                               MAITLAND - alkyl lead
                                                                                                                                                                  CORNWALL - PCB's. heavy metals

-------
                                                                      16
     In areas where sediments have high concentrations  of toxic  chemicals,
fish have higher concentrations of toxic chemicals in their tissues.
Concern about these in-place pollutants has grown with  discovery of high
rates of lip tumors in bullheads that feed on the bottom where sediments
are known to have high concentrations.of contaminants.   The volume  of
contaminated sediments is so large that removal  or other potential
remedies are very expensive.  Contaminants can be resuspended  in the
water column in the course of removal of sediments by dredging.   Also,
there is a lack of treatment and disposal  methods to assure safe disposal
after removal.  Whether the environmental  impact is greater from removal
of contaminated sediments or from leaving them in place is a major  issue
in many areas of concern.

     Leaching from landfills, directly  or through groundwater, can  be
another source of contaminants to the lakes.  Concern about this route
has grown with confirmation of substantial loadings from landfills  to
the Niagara River and with known groundwater contamination from  many
sources throughout the Great Lakes drainage basin.

     Where leaching from landfills is a factor,  remedial actions will
have to be coordinated with the Superfund and Resource  and Conservation
Recovery Act programs.  Whether to remove contaminated  sediments will
require consideration of whether removal will add to overall environ-
mental  contamination.  High costs may constrain  removal even when it
appears to be desirable.

     Agricultural runoff is another nonpoint source of  chemicals of
unknown dimensions.  Continuing increase in the  use of  pesticides
remains a major concern that needs to be evaluated.

     Atmospheric deposition of toxic contaminants adds  yet another
complex dimension to eventual control of toxic contaminants because of
the uncertainties about both sources and means of control.  Recent
research has shown how substances that  have settled out in sediments
can be excreted by benthic organisms in gasses as well  as resuspended
when the sediments are stirred up by the physical activities of  organisms.
Volatile organic chemicals also evaporate directly from the water
surface into the air.  Thus, substances that entered the lakes by
atmospheric deposition may be recycled by various mechnisms.  Current
understanding of how toxic contaminants cycle in the Great Lakes eco-
system is illustrated on page 18.

     In summary, control of both conventional and toxic pollution in
areas of concern involves multiple problems that will  require  special
remedial action plans to fit the specific situation.   State and  federal
wasteload allocations may be necessary, along with development and
testing of innovative technologies.

-------
                                                                      17


     High concentrations of both toxic and conventional  pollutants may
remain from past discharges.  Direct discharges  of pollutants may be
continuing in violation of discharge permit conditions.   The accumulations
may also be from land runoff or combined sewer overflows.

     Since most of the areas of concern are at the mouths of tributaries,
the accumulations may be from upstream as well as nearby sources.  In a
few cases, such as Waukegan Harbor, Illinois, the area of concern may
eligible for cleanup as a Superfund site.  In others,  such as Sheboygan
Harbor, Wisconsin, the site may not satisfy Superfund  criteria even
though the problems include a "toxic hotspot" of PCBs  or other contaminants.

     All areas of concern reflect multiple problems that will require special
remedial action plans to fit the specific situation.  Research and innovative
demonstration projects may be needed to address  such problems as safe removal
and disposal of sediments as well as wasteload allocations.  The Great Lakes
Office will work with the states and with EPA program  offices to coordinate
development and implementation of appropriate remedial plans for all areas of
concern in the five year period from 1986 through 1990.

-------
                                  ''Wy
                           Residence
                                  /
            Public Water Treatment Plant
Seepage Lagoon
                                                                              Auto Emission
                                                                                                      Industry

                                                                                                        Treatment Plant
                                                   Combined Sewer Overflows
                              Sanitary Landfill
                                     Resuspension
                                   Toxic Substances  < ;-
                                                •5-1 >  Phytoplankton
River
            Groundwater
                         Critters
                                      Sediments
             TOXIC  CYCLE
                                                                                                                               00

-------
                                                                            19
                 V. THE GREAT LAKES WATER QUALITY AGREEMENT

     The Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 affirmed that Canada and the United
States have equal rights to use of waterways that cross the international
border and that neither country has the right to pollute its neighbors
resources.  The International Joint Commission (IJC) was established as
an independent agency to assist the governments under the treaty.

     For many years the treaty chiefly provided a peaceful process for
limited regulation of water levels and flows for navigation and power
production.  In 1978, a second Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement added
an ecosystem approach to management and essentially zero discharge of
pollutants to the water quality objectives of the first agreement that
was signed in 1972.

     The agreement calls for remedial  actions against pollution and re-
search and monitoring of progress toward solving problems.  Implementation
in each country depends on integration of necessary remedial programs
into the national, provincial and state laws and policies.

     The common purpose expressed by the agreement is "to restore and
enhance water quality in the Great Lakes System" and "to prevent further
pollution of the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem."  EPA is the lead agency on
the U.S. side and the Great Lakes National Program Office was established
to coordinate EPA activities for the agreement.  The Great Lakes Office
manages some research, the Section 108 Demonstration Grant Program and the
Lakes Surveillance Program.

     All responsibilities under the agreement are divided equally between
the parties.  The IJC operates a binational  Great Lakes Regional Office
in Windsor, Ontario, that provides secretariat services to the two boards
of experts called for in the agreement.  The agencies represented in the
membership of the boards fund the participation of their own staff and
the activities required to serve the needs of the boards; no funds for
services by government agencies are provided by the IJC.

                   ROLE OF THE INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION

     The International Joint Commission can  call  attention to problems or
recommend actions to the governments.   Requests from the governments for
advice or study of problems are submitted as references.  The Great Lakes
agreement specifies IJC responsibilities for implementation.

     Membership in the two boards is divided along national  lines.  The
purpose of the Water Quality Board is  to advise the IJC about progress
under the agreement and to propose needed actions.  Its members generally
represent environmental management agencies,.with the administrator of
Region V, EPA, traditionally serving as chairman  of the U.S. section.
Support to the U.S. chairman is provided by  the Great Lakes  Office.

-------
                                                                        20
     The Science Advisory Board advises both the IJC and the Water
Quality Board about needed scientific research and carries  out  special
investigations on request.  The membership includes managers of Great
Lakes research programs and other experts.

     Both boards are assisted by task forces, subcommittees and special
committees for specific tasks.  Some activities are related to  the annexes
of the agreement; others carry out special projects and investigations
required by references to or from the IJC.

     The staff of the Great Lakes Office exchanges information  with other
U.S.  and Canadian agencies by participation in numerous IJC bodies.
They assist in design of research projects and to develop programs to  be
accomplished by EPA or in cooperation with other agencies.   Much time  is
spent in planning, writing and producing reports for the IJC activities.
Assignments of EPA staff to IJC joint institutions are shown on the next
page.

     Flexibility in the Great Lakes agreement process is assured by
provisions for notification between the parties about problems  that
require immediate attention, for coordination of research,  and  for review
and change of objectives if needed.  The 1978 agreement responded to ex-
perience under the first agreement in two ways.

     First, while the 1972 agreement called for control of  pesticides,
the 1978 agreement calls for control of all toxic substances that could
endanger the health or well-being of any living organism.  Second, re-
storation and enhancement are called for throughout the Great Lakes
Basin, not just in the waters of the Great Lakes.  The general  purposes
and obligations are described in the text of the agreement  but  specific
measures to reduce and prevent degradation are listed in the 12 annexes.
For EPA, Annexes 3, 11 and 12 are most important.

     Annex 3  focuses on phosphorus control.  It calls for  restoration  of
aerobic conditions year round in the central basin of Lake  Erie, elimina-
tion of nuisance growths of algae in Ontario and Michigan,  and  maintenance
of the oligotrophic status of Lakes Huron and Superior.  The need to meet
target loads for phosphorus for each lake established under this annex is
recognized in administration of the NPDES and construction  grants programs
under the Clean Water Act.  Target loads are now being met  for  Superior
and Huron but more reduction is needed in Saginaw Bay.  Plans to meet  the
target loads for Michigan, Ontario and Erie are due in 1985.

     Annex 11 calls for joint surveillance and monitoring to assess
compliance with requirements for pollution control in the various
jurisdictions, to evaluate water quality trends, and to identify emerging
problems.  The EPA Great Lakes Office operates the U.S. surveillance and
monitoring program under the agreement.

-------
     Annex 12 states that persistent toxic substances  should  be regulated
in order to virtually eliminate toxic substances  from  the Great Lakes
ecosystem.  Regulation should protect human health  and assure continued
productivity of aquatic resources.   This  annex requires research on how
to protect fish and wildlife as well as humans from exposure  to toxicants
and an early warning system for future problems due to toxic  substances.

     Annex 12 reinforces the function of  the Great  Lakes as an early warn-
ing system for environmental problems in  the biosphere.  U.S. compliance
with the Great Lakes agreement depends on integration  of remedial  activities,
research and monitoring with domestic environmental programs.

-------
                                                            22
   MEMBERSHIP OF GREAT LAKES OFFICE STAFF ON
INTERNATIONAL BOARDS, COMMITTEES AND TASK FORCES
           IJC Water Quality Board

            Programs Committee
            Toxic Substances Committee
            Nonpoint Source .Committee
            Surveillance Work Group
              Lake Michigan Task Force
              Lake Ontario Task Force
              Lake Superior Task Force
              Lake Huron Task Force
              Lake Erie Task Force
            Dredging Subcommittee
    Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study

            Management Committee
            Activity Integration Committee
            Point Source Work Group
            Criteria Task Force
            Sediment Work Group
            Nonpoint Source Work Group
            Water Work Group
            Biota Work Group
    St. Mary's River. St. Clair River, Lake St. Clair
    and Detroit River Task Force"

            Great Lakes Fishery Commission

            Fish Habitat Advisory Committee

            Niagara River Toxics Committee
    United States/Soviet Union of Soviet
    Socialist Republics Environmental Exchange

-------
                                                                          23
                      VI.  UNITED STATES PROGRAMS

     This section discusses how control of point and nonpoint source
pollution of the Great Lakes is addressed by U.S. environmental programs
and agencies and the status of compliance to date.

                             REMEDIAL PROGRAMS

     U.S. water pollution control programs are implemented in a partner-
ship between EPA's Water Divisions and the states that operate these
programs under authority delegated to them.  The Clean Water Act requires
a comprehensive program of technology-based effluent controls for pollution
from point sources.

     Requirements that cover both conventional and toxic pollutants
include secondary treatment and best practical treatment.  Best conven-
tional treatment can be required for conventional pollutants and best
available treatment and categorical pretreatment for toxic substances.  In
addition, water quality-based controls must be established where technology-
based requirements are not stringent enough to protect receiving waters.

     Sources of toxic contamination other than point sources cannot be
controlled by water pollution control programs alone, however.  Other
rentedialjfprograms that will assist control of toxic contamination are
authorized under the Clean Air Act, the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Compre-
hensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA or
Superfund), the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, Rodenticide Act (FIFRA),
and the Safe Drinking Water Act.

     The eight Great Lakes states also have their own environmental laws
and regulations.  Some state programs are to comply with federal require-
ments for delegation of implementation authority to state agencies.
Others are to implement state policies that are different from or that
supplement federal policy.

                             COMPLIANCE RESULTS

     Direct discharges into the Great Lakes system are now regulated
under nearly 4800 discharge permits for industry and municipal sewage
treatment facilities.  Through 1984, $7.0 billion in federal and state
grants has been invested in the Great Lakes basin for municipal sewage
treatment works.

     In 1985, more than 95 percent of the population in the Great Lakes
states in Region V is served by publicly owned treatment systems and 99
percent of the sanitary wastes in sewered areas receive at least secondary
treatment.  Additional  phosphorus removal is provided for 79 percent of
sewage, and 163 of 187 major facilities comply with the 1 mg/1 effluent
limit for phosphorus.  Advanced waste treatment is used in 15 percent of
publicly owned treatment works and 8 percent provide high level nitrogen
control.

-------
                                                                        24
     The figure on page 25 shows that reduction in phosphorus discharged
from municipal sewage treatment plants to Lakes Erie and Ontario or
approximately 80% reduction since 1972.  Discharges of biological  oxygen
demand and suspended solids have  been reduced by approximately the same
magnitude.  Such substantial compliance is reflected in clearer water,
less algae growth and return of desirable fish species to many locations.
The Great Lakes Office has provided special  compliance reports and funds
for special studies to other EPA programs, the states and other federal
agencies.

-------
                                                                  ONTARIO
                                                                     United States
1972197519761977197819791980198119821983
                                                1972197519761977197819791980 198119821983
             MUNICIPAL PHOSPHORUS LOADINGS TO THE LOWER GREAT LAKES
                                                                                                  K3
                                                                                                  Ln

-------
                                                                         26
                      ROLE OF THE GREAT LAKES OFFICE

     The Great Lakes Office routinely advises other EPA programs on how
federally funded state programs can support the Great Lakes agreement.
Technical guidance is also provided to the states and to EPA's Water
Divisions on consistency between water quality standards and agreement
objectives.  Priority is now being given to setting discharge limits for
toxic chemicals and heavy metals in NPDES permits and to establishment  of
pretreatment requirements for industrial discharges into publicly owned
treatment systems.

     Technical assistance is also provided by review of selected NPDES
permits and construction grant issues.  For example, 25 selected permits
were reviewed to determine whether specific facilities in areas of concern
are likely sources of pollutants concentrated in sediments and whether
appropriate controls are in place for prevention of further pollution.
In another project, phosphorus loadings were analyzed in combined sewer
overflows in 17 major metropolitan areas.

     Where wasteload allocations are needed to protect beneficial uses,
the Great Lakes program may support development of needed modeling.  In
1985, the Region V Water Division completed a master plan for the Grand
Calumet area in Indiana, a major Lake Michigan area of concern, with
support for public involvement from the Great Lakes Office.  A plan for
the Rouge River near Detroit is being developed by a consultant contract
funded by the Great Lakes Office.  Development of remedial action plans
in areas of concern will have high priority from 1986 to 1990.

     The Great Lakes Office also initiates development of information or
treatment technology needed to promote regulatory actions.  For example,
information about entrainment of organisms in cooling water systems was
provided by Great Lakes Office studies.  Improved phosphorus removal
technology has been developed with support from the Great Lakes Office
and analysis of industrial processes has provided better understanding  of
possible sources of toxic contaminants.

     Some coordination occurs through IJC institutions and studies.  EPA
also participates in the National Marine Research Plan for the Oceans and
Great Lakes that is developed under the lead of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration  (NOAA).  EPA and other agencies also cooperate
directly.  For example, the United States Geological Survey  (USGS) will
assist evaluation of groundwater connections and potential contamination
from landfills in the Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels  Study.

     Development of a uniform fish consumption  advisory for  Lake Michigan
during 1985 is another  example of the role of the Great Lakes Office as a
catalyst and  an expediter.  The  office  facilitated obtaining agreement
among health,  fishery and water  quality agencies in four  states  and among
federal  agencies.

-------
                                                                        27
                                  RESEARCH

     The Centre for Inland Waters carries out most federally-sponsored
Great Lakes research in Canada but U.S. research programs reflect the
more complex government structure and larger population.  U.S. research
for the lakes is carried out by several agencies, including EPA, that
coordinate and cooperate with each other.

     Within EPA, Great Lakes research is carried out principally by the
Large Lakes Research Station at Grosse lie, Michigan, and the National
Water Quality Laboratory at Duluth, Minnesota.  Research is sponsored by
the Office of Research and Development in EPA headquarters as well  as by
the Great Lakes Office.  Contracts with universities, private consultants
and other federal  agencies supplement EPA programs.  Large and complex
research projects are often carried out by interagency agreement.  Some
research is coordinated with Canadian research.

    Modeling of eutrophication processes by the Grosse He laboratory
has provided essential information for understanding how the Great  Lakes
have responded to phosphorus controls.  This laboratory has also supported
unique epiderm'ological research on human health effects of exposure to
PCBs by fish consumption.

     The NOAA Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory (GLERL) at
Ann Arbor, Michigan, carries out basic hydrologic and limnologic research.
GLERL research assisted basic understanding of the role of phosphorus in
the Great Lakes ecosystem.  A long-term GLERL study of how toxicants
cycle in the Great Lakes will assist development of management programs.

     The Great Lakes Fishery Laboratory of the Fish and Wildlife Service
primarily provides research and monitoring service to the Great Lakes
Fishery Commission, another Canada-U.S. agency.  The Fish and Wildlife
Service also cooperates with numerous other agencies in the fish monitor-
ing programs that are coordinated by EPA.

     Some state funding for Great Lakes research is provided to the Sea
Grant College programs in state universities.  Federal Sea Grant funding
is provided by NOAA.  The Sea Grant colleges presently support substantial
research on bioaccumulation of toxicants in fish and effects on other
biota.

     The Great Lakes Office has supported extensive research by Argonne
National Laboratory on atmospheric deposition to Lake Michigan.  Argonne
has also carried out major research on Lake Michigan biological systems.
Research by the Army Corps of Engineers focuses on levels and flows and
on dredging and disposal of dredge materials.

     Most of the research supported by Great Lakes Office assists manage-
ment programs.  For example, application of results of Grosse He modeling
studies continues to assist assessment of results of phosphorus controls.

-------
                                                                          28
     EPA-sponsored research assisted development of the Dredging Guide-
lines that are now used by both EPA and the Corps of Engineers in decisions
on confined disposal  of dredge materials.  Further research may be needed
as removal of in-place pollutants in sediments is carried out in areas of
concern.

     Research may be undertaken to answer a specific question, for example,
whether there is a link between an environmental problem such as genetic
defects in biota and a specific substance.  In one case a research grant
was made to the State University of New York at Buffalo to identify
manufacturing and waste disposal processes that could be potential sources
of the polychlorinated styrenes which have .accumulated in sediments and
fish in the Fields Brook-Ashtubla River and' Niagara River areas.  GLNPO
forwarded the results of this sources characterization, along with
toxicity data generated by Canadian researchers, to EPA's Existing
Chemical Assessment Division of the Office of Toxic Substances (OTS).
As a result, OTS initiated a preliminary review of polychlorinated
styrenes under the Toxic Substances Control Act that may lead to
further testing and subsequent rule-making.

     Other research is designed to answer more general questions.  The
Pollution from Land Use Reference Group (PLUARG) research was designed
to answer questions about nonpoint sour-ce pollution.  With coordination
and major funding by EPA, U.S. participants included the Soil Conservation
Service of the Department of Agriculture, the Army Corps of Engineers,
NOAA and state and local agencies.  Results provided a basis for promoting
conservation tillage with demonstration grants in the Lake Erie basin and
elsewhere.  PLUARG research also identified atmospheric deposition as a
major nonpoint source.

     Great Lakes research in the 1970s demonstrated that both wet and dry
deposition from the atmosphere is a major source of pollutants to the
Great Lakes but little is known about sources or transport.  Additional
research grants will  be made to assist development of remedial programs
for atmospheric deposition.

     As discussed earlier, the Great Lakes system serves as a laboratory
for identification of major environmental problems and for testing solutions,
Past Great Lakes research has provided significant information about
connections between land, air and water pollution.  Recognition of bio-
accumulation of pesticides and other toxicants in the Great Lakes food
chain revealed a new route for possible human exposure through fish con-
sumption.  Great Lakes research can be expected to provide new environ-
mental lessons in the future.

             FUNDING FOR GRANT PROGRAMS AND THE GREAT LAKES OFFICE

     The grant programs authorized in Sections 104 and 108 of the Clean
Water Act support EPA's role as the lead agency for meeting U.S. obliga-

-------
                                                                          29
                                          /

tions under the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement with Canada.   Nutrient
control has also depended on integration of Great Lakes agreement objectives
in the construction grants program under Section 201  and in the NPDES program.

     Section 104 authorizes funding of a wide range of EPA programs includ-
ing the Great Lakes Program which appears as a line item in the EPA budget.
Annual funding for the Office has ranged from 7.5 to 4.7 million  per year
with 1985 funding standing at 5.2 million.

     Section 108 authorized the Great Lakes Demonstration Grant Program for
the purpose of demonstrating new methods and techniques for the control  of
pollution within the Great Lakes Basin.  Authorization for Section 108 was
set at 20 million in 1982 and 18 million of the authority has been used to
date.

     About three-fourths of the 108 grants have addressed nonpoint sources
and related control practices.  During the past three years, most Section 108
projects have promoted conservation tillage and thereby substantially reduced
Great Lakes pollution by land runoff.  These Great Lakes projects have also
helped reduce loss of top soil, another critical national problem.

     Other Section 108 grants have supported evaluation of how natural wet-
lands reduce water pollution from septic systems; phosphorus removal techniques
for small municipal systems; and control of red clay erosion on the shores of
Lake Superior.

     Over $7 billion of federal and state funds has been spent to construct
municipal sewage treatment works in the U.S. Great Lakes states since 1972.
While not a special Great Lakes program, federal assistance to municipalities
has been essential to improved water quality in the lakes.

     The Great Lakes have also benefited from the areawide water  quality manage-
ment plans required under Section 208 in the 1972 act and the continuing state
water quality management planning under Section 205 (j) of the 1977 Clean Water
Act amendments.  Program grants to the states under Section 106 provide support
for a variety of abatement and control activities ranging from surveillance to
enforcement.

     The 104 appropriation covers salaries and other staff expenses for the
program, including the cost of EPA staff support to IJC boards, committees
and task forces.  It also covers operation of the research vessel, the
Roger R. Simons,  other monitoring and surveillance activities and for re-
search that is commissioned from universities, other agencies and consultants.

                           SURVEILLANCE AND MONITORING

     The goal of the Great Lakes monitoring program is to assess  the health
of the ecosystem, including effects of use of the lakes on human  health.
A new focus on the structure of the ecosystem and interactions between
species and between biota and their environment has evolved from  an

-------
                                                                        30

earlier focus on water chemistry.  For EPA Region V,  the regional  monitor-
ing strategy further describes the integration of related monitoring
activities.

     The original Great Lakes Environmental  Surveillance Plan  (GLISP)
called for intensive monitoring of one lake at a time with every lake
covered once or twice a decade.  The first nine-year  GLISP schedule began
in 1976, to be completed in 1983.  For conventional pollutants,  a  new
long term surveillance program has now evolved that requires  less  intensive
and less expensive collection of chemistry data but provides  information
about every lake annually.  Expanded monitoring for toxic contaminants  will
be more costly, however.

     The Great Lakes surveillance program meets the Great Lakes  agreement
requirement for monitoring compliance with the agreement's general  and
specific water quality objectives in the various jurisdictions.   It also
assists EPA's evaluation of program results.  Finally, emerging  problems
are detected.  While the monitoring program formerly  focused  on  measuring
levels of pollution, the surveillance and monitoring  strategy  now  aims
also to evaluate biological changes due to pollution.

     The surveillance strategy to be continued from 1986 to 1990 responds
to the need for annual measurements and.to budgetary  restrictions.   It
will provide a long-term base of both biological and  chemical  information
for the four lakes affected by eutrophication (Ontario, Erie,  Michigan  and
Huron) and for oligotrophic Superior.  In addition to further  assessment
of phosphorus control results, it will  provide vitally needed  information
for remedial programs for toxic contaminants.

     Samples from municipal water intakes will supplement open lake sampl-
ing by EPA.  Tributary monitoring by the states and the intake sampling
provide information about nearshore waters in the areas of concern  that
will be the focus of so much Great Lakes effort in 1986 to 1990.

     By 1986, new lake-by-lake surveillance plans will have been reviewed
by the Water Quality Board.  The surveillance strategy has three major  compon-
ents:  limnology, fish and atmospheric deposition.  In addition, sediments and
dredge sites have been sampled for in-place pollution in the  past.   They will
be examined again on a case-by-case basis in areas of concern  for  nutrients,
heavy metals, toxic organic compounds and oils and grease.

     In the limnology program, eutrophication models  are being developed and
tested to assist annual monitoring of both water chemistry and biological
productivity with less data collection.  The productivity measurements  will
then assist interpretation of species lists and evidence of community
changes.

     The conceptual eutrophication, or WASP, models developed  by the Grosse
He Large Lakes Research Station and Manhattan College relate  phytoplankton
productivity to phosphorus loadings.  The models will  be transferred from

-------
                                                                          31
EPA's mainframe computer in 1986 to personal  computers and new software
developed to assist the surveillance-research-management process.  The
EPA vessel will collect samples in Lakes Erie, Huron and Michigan.  Data
for Ontario and Superior will  be obtained by  interagency agreements,
grants or direct assessment as needed.

     The samples from water intakes with long-term records will  also allow
evaluation of acute conditions during spring  runoff and major storms and/or
behind the thermal  bar during  stratification.  Evaluation in 1988 using data
obtained in 1983 to 1987 will  help determine  the validity of earlier assump-
tions about relationships between phosphorus  loadings and algal  productivity.

     The fish monitoring program is carried out in cooperation with 20 state
and federal agencies listed below.  The four  elements of the program are open
lake monitoring of migratory fish, nearshore  monitoring of resident species
to detect sources of contaminants, evaluation of potential human exposure,
and assessment of effects of contaminants on  biota.

     Tissues of migratory species are collected and analyzed to detect trends
in contamination for the lakes as a whole.  The potential for human exposure
is evaluated by analysis of edible portions rather than the whole fish.  Con-
centrations of toxic substances will be located by analysis of resident fish
species and sediments.

     The Great Lakes Office is also field testing a program to determine the
effectiveness of biochemical indicators of fish health.  The study will
support development of long-term monitoring programs to determine the impacts
of contaminants on fish populations.  In addition to EPA, agencies cooperating
in the fish monitoring program are:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
U.S. Food and Drug Administration
National Cancer Institute
The Smithsonian Institution
New York Department of Environmental
Conservation
Pennsylvania Department of Natural
Resources
Ohio Department of Natural Resources
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
Michigan Department of Public Health
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Indiana State Board of Health
Indiana Department of Natural Resources
Illinois Department of Public Health
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Wisconsin Department of Health and Con-
sumer Affai rs
Wisconsin Department
Minnesota Department
Minnesota Pollution
 of Agriculture
 of Natural Resources
Control Agency
     In 1981 the Great Lakes Office established the Great Lakes Air Deposi-
tion (GLAD) network for three purposes:  (1) to determine atmospheric load-
ings of metals and nutrients; (2) to evaluate annual trends; and (3) to as-
sess results of various program strategies.  The addition of GLAD network data
to the EPA Acid Deposition System provides a single repository for atmospheric
deposition monitoring data for North America.  Participants in the GLAD network
are listed on the following page:

-------
                                                                            32
                Illinois Environmental  Protection  Agency
                Michigan Department  of  Natural  Resources
                Minnesota Pollution  Control  Agency
                New York Department  of  Environmental  Conservation
                Ohio Environmental  Protection Agency
                Ohio State University Research Foundation
                Erie County, Pennsylvania,  Department of  Health
                Wisconsin Department of Natural  Resources
                Environment Canada,  Canada  Centre  for Inland Waters

                              SPECIAL STUDIES

     In some cases, special studies  are undertaken by interagency agreement.
EPA, Environment Canada, the State  of New York and the Ministry of Environ-
ment of Ontario formed the Niagara  River Toxics Committee and undertook a
special study of the Niagara River  in 1984.  The Niagara  study provided com-
prehensive information about sources of toxic chemicals to the river and
confirmed that chemicals were entering  the  river by leaching from nearby
landfills.  The study also confirmed that the river is a  major source of
toxic contaminants to Lake Ontario.

     The Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels Study  was  organized in 1984 by
U.S. and Canadian resource agencies. Collectively, the St. Marys, St. Clair
and Detroit rivers and Lake St. Clair have  been identified as problem areas
and then as areas of concern by the  IJC since 1974.  The  multiyear study is
expected to provide needed information  about sediment transport and connections
between contaminated groundwater and the lakes to assist  development of a mass
balance framework for management and long-term monitoring in the connecting
channels.

     It is also expected to assist  design of remedial action plans for other
areas of concern as well as development of a mass balance framework for future
management of toxic contamination of the entire Great Lakes system.  Finally,
the ecosystem perspective of the study  is a major step toward the ecosystem
approach to management called for in the 1978 Great Lakes agreement.  The eco-
system approach considers relationships between land, air and water in identi-
fying sources and causes of degradation and in development of remedial meas-
ures for past pollution and prevention  of future environmental damage.

-------
                                                                        33
           VII.  A FIVE YEAR PROGRAM STRATEGY FOR THE GREAT LAKES

     This section lays out the program strategy for the Great Lakes
National Program Office for the next five years.  Remaining environmental
problems for the Great Lakes have been described in previous sections.
This section describes by sources of pollution what the Great Lakes
Office wants to accomplish by 1990 in cooperation with other EPA programs,
the states and other agencies.

     The total strategy described here is ambitious.  The actions
proposed are believed to be necessary to address Great Lakes problems
as they are currently understood.  In some cases, the Great Lakes
Office will continue to rely on other EPA programs and on other agencies
to carry out certain tasks.  Articulation of the overall  strategy will
enable the Great Lakes Office to focus its own activities logically and
to use available resources more efficiently.  This strategy is designed
to be consistent with and utilized in the EPA planning process.  It is
anticipated that this document will  be updated every other year.

     The program strategy is based on several concepts.  One concept is
that there are sequential stages in  solving environmental problems.
The time required for each varies, and they may overlap.   In each case,
and for each source, the proposed streategy considers the current stage
of efforts to address the problem.  Thus, much has already been
accomplished in control of conventional  pollutants, but control of toxic
contaminants is at an earlier stage, the strategy approaches these
problems in different ways.

     One concept of the strategy is  that environmental problems are
solved in stages.  The five stages are as follows:

     1.  Identification is the stage in which the problem is recognized
         as an existing or potential threat.  The problem may be revealed
         accidentally or may be discovered by ongoing surveillance and
         monitoring.

     2.  Assessment/Characterization is the stage in which the extent
         of the problem is qualitatively and quantatively characterized
         well enough to lead to consensus that corrective action is
         needed.

     3.  Proposal of Solutions involves testing ways to solve the problem.
         Modeling and demonstration projects may be undertaken to test the
         practicality and feasibility of possible solutions.

     4.  Implementation establishes and executes remedial programs.

-------
                                                                      34
     5.  Monitoring and Feedback includes measuring results  and evaluat-
         ing success in reversing the problem and  preventing further
         degradation.  Ongoing monitoring is necessary to detect new
         problems even when remedial  efforts have  abated  the original
         problem.  Remedial programs  may be modified to respond to new
         information.

     Another concept is that pollution control  must be pursued con-
currently on long-term and short-term tracks.  Long-term  activities are
identified that seek to measure the mass balance for toxic contaminants,
that is, what is received from all sources a*nd remains in the system.
A mass balance approach considers loadings from all sources  in regulating
to eliminate toxic effects.

           A MASS BALANCE APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES

     Traditionally, the management of water quality focused  on control
of direct discharges of pollutants.  Such sources  were the easiest to
identify, characterize and control, and the regulatory laws  dealt with
air, water and land as separate mediums.  For these reasons, restoration
and maintenance of water quality was  tied to control of point sources
from which contaminants were discharged directly into the nation's
waterways.

     With recognition that pollutants are also introduced indirectly
from contaminated air, soil and sediments that act as reservoirs, the
entire approach to management of Great Lakes water quality had to be
reassessed.  The reassessment led to  the conclusion that  the total con-
tributions of pollutants from all point and nonpoint sources have to be
quantified to support a mass balance  approach.

     In a mass balance approach, the  law of conservation  of  mass is
applied to the allocation of research, remedial action and regulation
efforts for water quality management.  The approach requires that the
quantities of contaminants entering the system, less quantities stored,
transformed or degraded within the system, must equal the quantity
leaving the system.  Once a mass balance budget has been  established
for each pollutant of concern, the long term effects on water quality
of the lakes can be simulated by mathematical modeling.

     If the projected concentrations  from known sources are  much lower
than the measured concentrations, the mass contribution of known sources
must be greater than presently estimated or as yet unidentified sources
must exist.  In this case, further investigation of sources  is required.
If mathematical simulation reveals that a water quality standard will
eventually be exceeded at the present or projected loading rate from
all sources, efforts can be directed  to reduction  from the sources most
amenable to control and remediation.

-------
                                                                         35
     The substances that already exceed water quality standards in the
open waters of the Great Lakes are highly persistent substances whose
masses entered the Great Lakes faster than they were lost, resulting in
accumulation over time.  The mass balance approach requires that discharge
of such pollutants be reduced as much as possible to allow the Great
Lakes to flush themselves in a meaningful timeframe.

     While the concept of mass balance is not new, only recently has
sufficient understanding of the routes and rates at which contaminants
enter, accumulate and leave the Great Lakes system been acquired to
make long term management of water quality possible according to mass
balance principles.  Over the next five years, the Great Lakes Office
intends to increase the accuracy with which rates of entry of pollutants
to the lakes can be measured or estimated, to test the adequacy of
existing mathematical models and to develop new models to address
deficiences that are identified in the models.

     The overall aim is, with available human, physical and fiscal
resources, to develop the best mix of remedial and regulatory activities
to achieve the most rapid remedial action for the critical pollutants
identified by the IJC Water Quality Board.  Even with priorities set
and a directed program, years may be required to achieve a mass balance
approach.  Meanwhile, as sources and loadings are understood, activities
are identified to assist immediate regulatory actions.  These actions
may be localized where the threat of the sources is known, leading to
geographic scope as another concept in the strategy.

     The activities described here have a range of geographic scope as
well as time.  Some activities consider impacts on the entire Great
Lakes ecosystem; others, like the remedial action plans for the areas
of concern, are site specific.  The Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channels
Study covers three localized areas of concern.  The mass balance concept
on which this study is based is expected to serve as a laboratory for
much of the work proposed in the five year strategy.

     Finally, the Great Lakes Office will continue its commitment to
assess results of remedial  efforts and to detect emerging problems.
While surveillance and monitoring will continue to evolve and may be
modified as new understanding develops, the rationale for the current
direction of the program is also discussed here.

     Objectives of the five-year program for various sources and problems
and year-by-year activities to accomplish the objectives are discussed
below.  The activities described are believed necessary to achieve the
objectives and will be pursued over a longer period of time if resources
do not allow completion within the next five years.

                           CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS

     Great progress has been made in controlling conventional pollution
in the Great Lakes, but target loadings for phosphorus required by the

-------
                                                                        36


binational agreement have not been achieved for Erie and Ontario.  Mass
balance estimates for phosphorus for each lake have revealed that meeting
the target loadings will require compliance with the 1  mg/1  effluent
limit by all major publicly owned treatment works, plus additional
reductions of loadings from nonpoint sources such as land runoff.
Without more nonpoint reductions, additional point source controls will
be needed to meet the target loadings in Saginaw Bay, and Lakes Erie
and Ontario.

    Current remedial programs assume that phosphorus is the  limiting
nutrient for the Great Lakes.  As target loadings are met, productivity
monitoring will reveal the results of reducing phosphorus loadings.
Increases of other conventional pollutants must be watched and under-
stood, especially for sodium, chlorides and nitrates.  The concern is
that, although current levels are still low, the rates  of increase are
high enough in some parts of the system to lead to potential environ-
mental change in the future.

    Although abatement of toxic contamination is needed in most IJC
areas of concern, more control  of conventional pollutants, such as BOD
and total dissolved solids, is  also still needed in many cases.  In
general, gross pollution by conventional pollutants as  well  as toxic
contamination is now concentrated in certain areas of concern such as
the Grand Calumet River basin and Saginaw Bay.

                  POINT SOURCES OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS

     By 1990, all publicly owned treatment works should be meeting
the 1 mg/1 limit for phosphorus discharges into the Great Lakes.
Permit requirements should be in place for all municipal systems that
will need to meet stricter limits for phosphorus than 1 mg/1.

     The Great Lakes Office will track compliance and provide technical
assistance to states and to EPA Water Divisions.  Demonstration projects
for innovative technologies will be supported, particularly  for combined
sewer overflows.  Information on the effectiveness of phosphorus detergent
bans will be provided throughout the period.

     Year by year, the chief activities of the five year strategy are as
follows:

FY 86
-Report/track compliance rates of publicly owned treatment systems. *

-  Provide technical information on detergent phosphate bans. *

-  Assist Water Divisions with  NPDES permit revisions to conform with cur-
   rent information about pollutants and their effects  on biota and water
   quality. *


*  Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                         37
-  Identify industrial sources of phosphorus to the Great Lakes. *

-  Begin demonstration on the RIM-NUT technology for phosphorus removal  and
   complete the A/0 phosphorus uptake project. **

-  Finalize binational protocols on biological monitoring to track lake/biota
   reactions to declining phosphorus loadings.

FY 87
~Provide technical assistance in implementation of Best Conventional  Techno-
   logy (BCT) regulation. *

-  Hold a workshop to report on innovative technologies including RIM-NUT. **

FY 88
-  Determine by state, through audit of surveillance results, if additional
   phosphorus controls will be required for publicly owned treatment systems.

-  Identify industrial sources in each state that may need stricter control
   limits than Best Control Technology (BCT).

-  Implement revised water chemistry surveillance.

FY 89/90
-Continue surveillance and remedial program assistance.

                  NONPOINT SOURCES OF CONVENTIONAL POLLUTANTS

     In five years nonpoint source programs for Saginaw Bay, Lake Erie  and Lake
Ontario should be near completion and routine.  The accuracy and effectiveness
of the programs should have been assessed.  Plans should be completed for deal-
ing with combined sewer overflows (CSOs)  that cause dissolved oxygen problems.
Development of CSO plans will depend on integration of remedial  activities, re-
search and monitoring into the continuing planning process for water quality.
Funding to implement CSO plans should be  identified and implementation  underway,

     Year by year activities are as follows:

     FY 86/87
     -  Provide technical assistance, as  requested, for implementation  of
        state nonpoint source programs. *

*  Ongoing activity through the five year period.

** RIM-NUT is an innovative technology that is said to achieve 0.1 mg/1  removal
   with a salable product and the A/0 technology is said to provide low cost
   treatment to below 1 mg/1.

-------
                                                                        38
     -  Monitor state  implementation  of  phosphorus  reduction plans. *

     -  Complete revisions  to  U.S.  phosphorus  control plans for nonpoint sources
        and review water quality  management  plan  submissions for Water  Divisions.

        Complete Erie  and Ontario low tillage  demonstration projects.

        Implement a revised system for tracking nonpoint  control practices.

     -  Complete study to determine effectiveness of  various approaches to manage
        pollution from nonpoint  sources.

     -  Assist development  of  remedial action  plans for CSOs and support demon-
        stration projects.

     -  Develop recommendations  related  to the impact of  sodium and chlorides  in
        the aquatic ecosystem.  Identify issues  related to nitrate  increases.

     FY 88/89
     -  Determine rate of implementation  of  nonpoint  source  reductions  and  im-
        pacts on implementation of point  source  control  program  for  each  state.

     -  Assist Water Division review of CSO  remedial  action  plans.

     FY 90
     -  Continue monitoring and remedial  program assistance.

                           CONTROL OF TOXIC  CONTAMINANTS

     Existing U.S. laws and programs are  adequate to  deal  with toxic contaminants
from point sources if the source is well  quantified.   Toxicants  from some sources,
such as groundwater leachates and sediments, have not been fully dealt  with under
existing laws and programs.  For toxic contaminants transported  in the  atmosphere,
existing legislative mandates may not be  adequate.

     This strategy addresses both toxicity for Great  Lakes biota and potential
human health impacts from fish consumption or other direct exposure. The Great
Lakes Office is participating in and supporting  measurement  of current  concentra-
tions, trends in toxic contamination and  effectiveness of  remedial actions.  This
and other work on mass balance models is  intended to  support  remedial programs.

     Obtaining information on toxicants from all  sources so  that mass balance
models can lead to regulatory actions will require time and  more information
on loadings from several  sources.  To direct research in support of  mass  balance
work, the IJC Water Quality Board has identified the  chemicals that  represent
the families of chemicals for which there is a consensus that control is  needed.


*  Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                        39
     The long-term work toward mass balance models will  not limit EPA's
response to known problems in the short term.  When acute or chronic
toxicity affects human health or other criteria are being violated, the
Great Lakes Office will support remedial  actions regardless of the source
of the pollutants.

                         POINT SOURCES OF TOXIC CONTAMINANTS

     The aim of the strategy is that, to the extent possible, by 1990
there should be no direct discharges in the Great Lakes  basin of effluents
that are acutely or chronically toxic to aquatic biota.   The characteristics
and amounts of toxic chemicals in all point source effluents should be
known.  Total loadings of critical toxicants can then be quantified and a
mass balance approach taken to regulation that aims to preserve ecological
integrity.

     The Great Lakes program will provide technical support and financial
assistance for innovative demonstration projects and track compliance
with remedial programs toward this end.  Proposed yearly activities are:

     FY 86
     -  Provide assistance as necessary in development and implementation
        of water-quality based effluent limits for NPDES permits, including
        reviewing standards and pretreatment requirements, wasteload
        allocations and major (selected)  permit modifications. *

     -  Assist the Water Divisions in promoting biological testing of
        effluents, both in developing state capacity and pilot testing of
        point sources.

     -  Design an information system that supports use of point source
        data in mass balance modeling.

     -  Initiate dialogue with the Office of Water to develop criteria
        for the addition of selected Great Lakes chemicals of concern to
        the Section 307 Priority Pollutant List of the Clean Water Act.

     FY 87/88
     -Report on the extent of remaining toxicity in effluents from
        point sources in the basin.  Continue to assist  Water Divisions
        with permit revisions. *

     -  Quantify point source loadings of critical chemicals for mass
        balance models.

     FY 89/90
     -  Determine, to the extent possible, which point sources still
        contribute to loadings that exceed limits dictated by mass balance
        models, that is, that affect beneficial  water uses, and initiate
        appropriate controls.

     *  Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                        40
                  TOXIC CONTAMINANTS FROM NONPOINT SOURCES

     Significant toxicant loadings  from nonpoint  sources  will  also  need
to be determined to the extent possible by 1990.   In  this strategy,
nonpoint sources include urban stormwater runoff,  combined  sewer overflows
(CSOs), and agricultural runoff.   Atmospheric deposition, in-place  polluted
sediments and groundwater are treated separately.

     The Great Lakes Office will  support monitoring and modeling to obtain
loading estimates for all nonpoint  sources.  Persistent chemicals will be
tracked, and where necessary, referred to EPA's  Office of Pesticides and
Toxic Substances for potential regulation.

     FY 86
     ~Design and test a monitoring program to  estimate  agricultural
        loadings.

     -  Identify and carry out biomonitoring tests for toxicants from CSOs.

     -  Assist development of remedial actions for areas  of concern where
        CSOs are causing toxic problems.

     -  Determine whether additional monitoring  studies are necessary for
        separate stormwater sewers  that discharge into the  system.

     FY 87
     1:1  Work with the Office of Pesticide Programs for early identification
        of pesticides that are bioaccumulating in the Great Lakes as an
        early warning system for pesticides that cause environmental
        problems. *

     -  Modify tributary monitoring to incorporate the findings from
        agricultural monitoring programs.  Continue testing and demonstra-
        tions as needed.

     -  Begin development of predictive models for total  loadings from
        nonpoint sources.

     FY 88/89
     -  Continue to monitor nonpoint sources to help test and refine
        loading models.

     -  Track and assist implementation of CSO controls in  areas of concern.

     -  Assess effectiveness of Best Management Practices to reduce toxic
        loadings, and demonstrate and promote alternative methods,  if
        necessary.


     *  Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                        41

     FY 90
     -  Report on whether there is any need for additional  control  of
        toxicants from nonpoint sources.

     -  Recommend additional  regulatory or nonregulatory measures if
        success appears unlikely with existing programs.

                            ATMOSPHERIC DEPOSITION

     The atmospheric deposition program has three objectives:   (1)  to
determine the portion of total  loadings of critical  toxic pollutants by
atmospheric deposition; (2) to recommend the extent  to which additional
remedial programs and and international activities are needed  to control
atmospheric sources, and (3)  to provide source information for immediate
regulatory action.

     The GLAD network has been operational since 1981  but certain technical
questions need to be addressed.  When there is confidence that accurate
loading estimates are being obtained, modeling (including analysis  of
fate and transport) needs to be completed.

     The Great Lakes Office will continue to operate the GLAD  network in
cooperation with the states and to determine whether there is  a need for
additional regulatory authority to control toxicants in the atmosphere.  It
will also support refinements of the ability of the  Air Divisions to
monitor, model and regulate toxic air pollutants under existing authority.

     FY 86
     -  Operate the GLAD network. *

     -  Complete redesign of the GLAD network.  Working with the Air
        Divisions, reach agreement with Canada on technical issues  and
        network design using recommendations from the states and the list
        of critical pollutants identified by the Water Quality Board.

     -  Complete analysis of atmospheric deposition  samplers.

     -  Report on initial findings of first five years of GLAD sampling,
        with hypothesis on relative significance of  atmospheric loadings.

     FY 87
     -Modify GLAD network to reflect findings reported in FY 86.

     -  With Air Divisions, devise system to identify sources  and
        categories of sources of atmospheric loadings.  Assist regulatory
        programs if possible.

     -  Determine modeling needs for atmospheric deposition to complete
        mass balance work on toxic contaminants in the lakes.   Begin
        design of modeling program with Air Divisions and ORD.

*  Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                       42
     -  Undertake study to determine significance of volatilization.

     FY 88/89
     -Complete and test fate, transport and loading models  of critical
        toxic contaminants.

     -  Using models and GLAD results, report significance of atmospheric
        1oadi ngs.

     -  Analyze options for regulatory control,  if necessary.

     -  Using source information generated- in FY 87, estimate loadings by
        sources and locations.

     FY 90
     -  Complete a program plan to quantify,  to  the extent possible,
        atmospheric transport of toxicants, with recommendations for
        regulatory programs, if warranted.

     -  Assist remedial programs as possible.

                         IN-PLACE POLLUTED SEDIMENTS

     All 28 areas of concern in the United States have polluted in-place
sediments.  For contamination from this source,  the objectives by 1990
are:  (1)  a remedial action plan submitted to the Water Quality Board and
certified as an updated water quality management plan; (2) determination
of where removal and disposal of contaminated sediments is the best
option; and (3) remedial action plans that are underway or complete.
Criteria should be in place and bioaccumulation  tests agreed  on, with
methodologies and procedures for in-place pollutants in sediments tested,
refined and recommended.

     FY 86
     -  Assist review of remedial plans for areas of concern  through  the
        water quality management process of the  Water Divisions.  *

     -  Provide technical assistance to Waste and Water Divisions. *

     -  Assist the states in completing remedial action plans for areas of
        concern. *

     -  Track and report implementation of alternative removal  and disposal
        technologies by the Corps and by the  Water and Waste  Divisions.

     -  Design a demonstation program for removal  to be supported by  the
        Great Lakes Office.
        On-going activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                       43

     -  Begin development of use of biological  indicators  for  determining
        bioaccumulation rates in biota from contaminated sediments,  to
        help measure results of remedial  actions,  to identify  toxic  hot
        spots that need attention and to  determine where no  action is the
        best alternative.

     -  Develop a memorandum of understanding  with the Corps of  Engineers
        and Fish and Wildlife Service for monitoring of in-place polluted
        sediments.

     -  Assist completion of sediment criteria.

        Inventory models and data for transport/fate assessment  in sedi-
        ments.

FY 87/88
     -  Begin implementation of a multiyear demonstration  program for re-
        moval, treatment and disposal of  polluted  sediments  in areas of
        concern.

     -  Track results of remedial activities of  EPA, the states  and  the
        Corps. *

     -  Using the methods developed earlier, report on biological  impacts
        of polluted sediments in all  existing  areas of concern.

     -  Field test transport-fate models.

FY 90
     -  Report on polluted sediment demonstration  project, with  recommend-
        ations for removal, treatment and disposal technologies.

     -  Recommend addition programs,  if deemed necessary.

     -  Apply field-validated models  to high priority area of  concern sites,

                    TOXIC CONTAMINATION FROM GROUNDWATER

     In five years, toxic pollution of the Great Lakes by  groundwater  in-
filtration should be understood and loadings estimated.  It  will be
necessary to develop models and project sources  and loadings.   The Great
Lakes Office will assist the Waste Divisions of  EPA with  remedial  programs
for landfills or other sources that contaminate  the Great  Lakes system
through groundwaters.

     FY 86
     -  Assist regulatory programs as necessary. *


*  Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                       44

     -  Demonstration projects with Water Divisions,  states  and the U.S.
        Geological  Survey (USGS) to determine actual  loadings  from ground-
        waters in certain areas of concern, such as  the Upper  Great Lakes
        Connecting  Channels.

     -  Assist the  Water and Waste Divisions and the  states  to inventory  po-
        tential sources of groundwater pollution such as landfills and deep
        well injections.

     -  With EPA's  ORD and the USGS, design a study  project  to produce a
        predictive  model for total groundwater loadings of critical toxic
        pollutants.

     -  Complete and monitor groundwater infiltration demonstration
        projects Support additional projects if needed.

     -  Complete source inventory.

     -  Complete and test predictive model.

     FY 90
     -Report findings of demonstration projects and begin  using information
        to project  total loadings.

     -  Recommend additional remedial  activities if  needed.

            PRIORITIZATION AND MASS BALANCE MODELING FOR TOXICANTS

     It is unrealistic to expect verifiable mass balance models by 1990 for
critical toxicants  from all sources to the Great Lakes but major progress can
be made.  The following activities should be achieved:  (1)  critical  toxic
pollutants listed;  (2) a mass balance predictive model designed; (3)  loading
models completed, tested and in use for each source;  (4) the overall  mass bal-
ance model tested for certain pollutants in specific geographic areas such as
Saginaw Bay or Green Bay, and (5) work started to apply the  model  to an entire
lake such as Ontario or Erie.

     The Great Lakes Office will participate in Water Quality  Board activities
to promote this work and will support ORD and others  to develop needed programs.

     FY 86
     -  Continue review of critical pollutant list.  *

     -  Support detailed analysis of modeling needs.

     -  Support and participate in testing of mass balance modeling in the
        Upper Great Lakes Connecting Channel Study.

     -  Through the Water Quality Board, complete a  list of  critical  pollutants,

*  Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                         45

     FY 87
     -  Design a mass balance modeling program for critical  toxic pollu-
        tants, including a test program for four geographic  areas of
        concern and begin testing the model using data generated by other
        elements of this study.

     -  Report on the connecting channels study.

     FY 88/89
     -  Refine model and complete work in geographic areas of concern.
        Begin work on a lake-wide mass balance model.

     -  Revise source-specific models and use to direct surveillance
        activities.

     FY 90
     -  Continue development of lake-wide mass balance model; expand to
        additional critical toxic pollutants.

                         FISH MONITORING AND HEALTH EFFECTS

     The objectives of the fish monitoring program are to relate toxic
contamination of the Great Lakes to effects on biota and to  determine
potential human exposure by fish consumption.  By 1990, accomplishments
should include:  (1) binational agreement on technical methods for develop-
ment of consensus on reporting fish advisories; (2) binational protocols
for measuring aquatic chronic and acute toxicity;  (3) binational under-
standing of risk assessment methodologies used in setting fish advisories,
and (4) increased understanding of epidemiological effects of fish con-
sumption and other pathways for human exposure to critical toxic pollutants
in the Great Lakes.

     FY 86
     -  Continue collection and analysis of migratory and resident fish. *

     -  Participate in Water Quality Board forums on risk assessment. *

     -  Continue trend monitoring for critical chemicals.

     -  Reach agreement on methods and standards for state fish advisories
        and begin discussions with Canada for system-wide uniform standards.

     FY 86 continued
     -Outline biological monitoring techniques for aquatic toxicity
        measurements and recommend international protocols.

     -  Complete inventory of epidemiological data and design a long-term
        study for assessment of human health risks.


*  Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                         46

     FY 87/88
     -Refine U.S.  public health  fish advisories  and  seek  agreement  with
        Canada on binational  methods.

        Initiate discussions  with  states  on  uniform standards  for fish
        advisories.

     -  Work with the Food and Drug Administration to  refine  interstate
        commerce advisories to reflect most  recent information.

     -  Reach binational  accord on biological  monitoring  procedures  and
        undertake joint demonstration  programs.

     -  Encourage continued epidemiological  studies of human  health  im-
        pacts of exposure by  fish  consumption.

     FY 89/90
     -  Initiate a study to assess potential  multimedia exposure for
        humans to Great Lakes toxicants by fish  consumption and  other
        means.

               SURVEILLANCE OF CONVENTIONAL  AND  TOXIC  POLLUTANTS

     The Great Lakes surveillance  program will continue to  evolve as
problems and remedial programs change.  Monitoring obligations under  the
Great Lakes agreement will be met, including support for  laboratory  work,
in cooperation with the Water, Waste and Air Divisions and  the states.
In accordance with EPA policy, all environmental  measurement  projects
will have a quality assurance project  plan.

     By 1990, the program for conventional pollutants  should  be  redesigned
to address productivity and annual trends, in wet and dry  atmospheric
loadings of metals and nutrients should have been determined.  Monitoring
of toxic pollutants in the five year period  will  support  mass  balance
modeling and trend analysis for contamination by critical toxic  chemicals.

     Many of the activities described  earlier for addressing  toxic con-
tamination, such as operation of the GLAD network and  fish  monitoring,
are part of the overall surveillance and monitoring program but  are  not
repeated here in detail.  Monitoring activities  for conventional pollutants
are listed below:

     FY 86
     -Transfer WASP model to IBM-PC-ATs

     -  Continued collection of precipitation samples  of  metals  and
        nutrients. *

     -  Submit GLAD network data to the International  Acid  Deposition
        system. *
   Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                        47
     -  Begin biota productivity monitoring for Lake Michigan and Ontario. *

     -  Redesign of GLAD network, with co-located monitoring with Environ-
        ment Canada at Niagara-on-the-Lake and at Milwaukee.

     -  Assist and support monitoring programs concerning toxic pollutants
        from nonpoint sources, including sediments and groundwater.

     -  Collect open lake data for trend analysis in all  five lakes.

     -  Continue open lake annual limnology program on Lake Michigan,
        Huron and Erie.  Expand limnology program to Lake Ontario to
        obtain basic data.

     FY 87
     -  Continue productivity monitoring on Lake Michigan and Lake Ontario.
        Evaluate results of FY 86 work to determine if productivity
        monitoring should be expanded to Lakes Huron and  Erie.

     -  Use mass balance techniques to determine contribution of atmospheric
        loadings to Great Lakes and provide technical  assistance to remedial
        and regulatory programs. *

     -  Implement revised GLAD network. *

     FY 88/90
     -  Evaluate the open lake limnology program.  Design program for open-
        lake for FY 89-90 based on evaluation of results  from FY 83-87.

                               PUBLIC INFORMATION

     Public support was critical for the programs that addessed degradation
caused by overenrichment and conventional  pollutants.   A  public information
program is needed to increase public understanding of  toxic contamination
and the ecosystem approach to management that this complex problem requires.

     Over the next five years, the Great Lakes Office  will seek to assist
public knowledge of the Great Lakes ecosystem as well  as  about how problems
are being addressed.  Special efforts will be made to  involve communities
in development of remedial action plans for areas of concern.  Activities
will include:

     FY 86
     -  Support public involvement in development of remedial action plans
        for areas of concern. *

     -  Complete development of an ongoing outreach program of public
        education about the Great Lakes ecosystem and  current problems.
        Ongoing activity through the five year period.

-------
                                                                 48
-  Produce and distribute an atlas of Great Lakes resources.

-  Complete an annual  report of EPA Great Lakes activities for public
   use.

-  Report on results of special studies and surveillance activities.

FY 87
-  Produce and distribute an annotated index of EPA Great Lakes
   publications.

-  Support public education activities related to U.S. implementation
   of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement.

   In cooperation with other agencies, compile a listing of sources
   of Great Lakes information for the general  public.

FY 88/90

-  Continue reporting on EPA Great Lakes programs and projects.

-  Continue support for public involvement in area of concern plans.

-------
                                                                       49
                                  REFERENCES

Eisenreich, S., Ed.:  Atmospheric Inputs of Pollutants to Natural  Waters,
  Ann Arbor Press, 1982.

Great Lakes Diversions and Consumptive Uses, Report to the International
  Joint Commission by the Great Lakes Diversions and Consumptive Uses
  Study Board, Army Corps of Engineers, North Central  Division, Chicago,  1981.

Mackay, D., et al., Eds.:  Physical  Behavior of PCBs in the Great  Lakes,
  Ann Arbor Press, 1983.

Nrigu, J., and Simmons, M., Eds.:  Toxic Contaminants  in the Great Lakes,  Wiley,
  1984.

Water Quality Board Report to the International  Joint  Commission,  Great  Lakes
  Regional Office, Windsor, Ontario, November, 1983.

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse
                                                    DATA
                                                    before completing)
 1. REPORT NO.
   EPA-905/9-85-002
                              2.
                                                            3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOWNO.
 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
   Five Year Program  Strategy for
   Great Lakes National  Program
   Office 1986-1990
                                                           5. REPORT DATE
                                                              August 1985
                                                           6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE

                                                              5GL
7. AUTHOR(S)
  Peter  L.  Wise,
  Leila  Botts
                                                            8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
                   Kent  Fuller and
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
   Northwestern University Center for
   Urban Affairs and  Policy Research
   633 Clark Street
   Evanston, Illinois 60201
                                                            10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
                                                           11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.

                                                              R005804-01
 12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
   U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
   Great Lakes National  Program Office
   536 South Clark Street, Room 958
   Chicago, Illinois  60605	
                                                           13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
                                                              Strategy 1986-1990
                                                           14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                                                             Great Lakes  National  Program
                                                             Office-USEPA,  Region V
 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

   Kent Fuller, Project  Officer
 16. ABSTRACT
   This document lays  out  a five year program strategy for the  Great Lakes National
   Program Office  of the Environmental  Protection Agency (EPA).   This office coordinate
   with other EPA  programs and with other  agencies to support activities that benefit
   the Great Lakes  and assist implementation  of the Great Lakes  Water Quality Agreement
   with Canada.

   The program strategy has two purposes.   One is to inform other EPA programs, federal
   agencies and the states how the Great Lakes Office will address its longterm goals
   from 1986 to 1990.   The other is to  assist efficient use of  resources and annual
   budgeting by setting program priorities.
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
                                              b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  C.  COSATI Field/Group
   Water Quality
   Phosphorus
   Toxic substances
   Atmospheric loading
   Ecosystem
   Nonpoint source
 a. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT  Document is available
  to public through  the  National  Information
  Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA 22161
                                              19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
21. NO. OF PAGES
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)


•fr US GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1986—643-255/758

-------