United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Great Lakes
National Program Office
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, Illinois 60604
EPA 905-R94-002
January 1994
A Summary of
Contaminated Sediment
Activities Within The
United States Great Lakes
Areas of Concern
United States Areas of Concern
-------
A SUMMARY OF CONTAMINATED SEDIMENT
/ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE UNITED STATES
GREAT LAKES AREAS OF CONCERN
-Vs
^ Callie Bolattino, Intern
National Network for
Environmental Management Studies Program
Indiana University
Bloomington, Indiana
Project Officer:
Marc Tuchman
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Great Lakes National Program Office
August, 1993
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 5, Library (PL-12J)
77 West Jackson Boulevacd, 12th Floor
Chicago, IL 60604-3590
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report was furnished to the U.5. Environmental Protection Agency by the student
identified on the cover page, under a National Network for Environmental Management Studies
(NNEMS) fellowship.
The contents are essentially as received from the author. The opinions, findings, and
conclusions expressed are those of the author and not necessarily of the U.5. Environmental
Protection Agency. Mention, if any, of company, process, or product names is not to be
considered an endorsement by the U.5. Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
Table of Contents
List of Acronyms 3
Acknowledgments 4
Introduction 5
Descriptions of Sites
Illinois
Waukegan Harbor 9
Indiana
Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Canal 12
Michigan
Clinton River 16
Deer Lake/Carp River/Carp Creek 17
Detroit River 19
Kalamazoo River 21
Manistique River 23
Muskegon Lake 24
River Raisin 26
Rouge River 28
Saginaw River/Bay 30
Torch Lake 33
White Lake 34
Minnesota
St. Louis River/Bay 36
New York
Buffalo River 39
Eighteenmile Creek 41
Niagara River 42
Oswego River 44
Rochester Embayment 46
St. Lawrence River (Massena) 47
Ohio
Ashtabula River 50
Black River 53
Cuyahoga River 54
Maumee River 56
Pennsylvania
Presque Isle Bay 59
-------
Wisconsin
Fox River/Lower Green Bay 61
Menominee River 63
Milwaukee Estuary 65
Sheboygan River/Harbor 68
Summary 71
References 72
Appendix A
Appendix B
-------
List of Acronyms
AOC
ARCS
BMP
BHC
CDF
C50
OF
GLNPO
GLWQA
GLWQB
IDEM
IEPA
UC
IPP
MDNR
MPCA
NPDE5
NPL
NY5DEC
OEPA
OME
OU
PADER
PAH
PCB
PRP
RAP
RCRA
RI/F5
ROD
5AIC
SCS
5EMCOG
TKN
T5CA
USACE
U5EPA
U5FDA
U5FWS
VOC
WDNR
WWTP
Area of Concern
Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments
Best Management Practice
Hexachlorocyclohexane
Confined Disposal Facility
Combined Sewer Overflow
Confined Treatment Facility
Great Lakes National Program Office
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
Great Lakes Water Quality Board
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency
International Joint Commission
In-Place Pollutants
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
National Priority List
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
Ontario Ministry of the Environment
Operable Unit
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbon
Polychlorinated Biphenyl
Potentially Responsible Party
Remedial Action Plan
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
Record of Decision
Science Applications International Corporation
Soil Conservation Service
Southeast Michigan Council of Governments
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
Toxic Substances Control Act
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Environmental Protection Agency
US Food and Drug Administration
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Volatile Organic Compound
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
Wastewater Treatment Plant
-------
Acknowledgments
In preparing this report it was important to amass all of the Remedial Action Plans
(RAPs), scientific studies and assorted documentation that were available for each of the US
AOCs. In doing so, many state and federal employees involved in the RAP process had to locate
and send reports, take time to answer questions and provide requests regarding these sites.
All of these efforts were greatly appreciated.
A special thanks must go to the Remedial Programs Staff in the Great Lakes National
Program Office (Gi.NPO) for the interest that was shown in this project and the sincere effort that
was put forth to make the "government experience" a positive one.
-------
Introduction
Formed by glacial activity approximately 12,000 years ago, the Great Lakes comprise a
unique ecosystem that, as a result of industrialization and human intervention, has been
degraded over time. Canada and the United States have long depended upon the Great
Lakes for a drinking water supply sufficient to support 24 million people, and for the resources
and mobility to enhance technological production and transportation (Hartig and Thomas,
1988). The Great Lakes provide the natural resources needed to give Canada and the US an
economic boost in the competitive, industrialized world. Considering the magnitude of human
intervention that has occurred within the Great Lakes, it is not surprising that there is the need for
an increasing effort to remediate the natural ecosystem damage that has resulted from human
demands.
In 1909 with the signing of the Boundary Waters Treaty, Canada and the US agreed to
collectively manage and protect shared Great Lakes water. This treaty established the
International Joint Commission (UC), comprised of three presidential appointees and three
appointees of Canada's prime minister, to oversee the quantity of water used by the two
countries and to examine the quality of water in the Great Lakes. Over the years the UC worked
to identify sources of pollutants and to provide remedial recommendations to the states,
provinces and federal governments for addressing the contamination within the Great Lakes.
However, the advisory efforts of the UC proved to be no match for the continual demands of a
growing society as the environmental problems of the Great Lakes expanded.
The first Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (GLWQA) was signed in 1972 and with it
the duties of the UC were revised and expanded. This agreement was signed by both Canada
and the US and represented a joint commitment to restore and maintain the Great Lakes
ecosystem. The UC relied on the Great Lakes Water Quality Board (GLWQB), their principal
advisor, in order to meet this challenge. To begin the process, areas that had severely
impaired water quality and were in need of remediation strategies, were identified by the
GLWQB and were listed by the UC as "problem areas" (Hartig and Thomas, 1988).
The expansion of the GLWQA in 1978, along with the amendments in 1987, established
the currently used guidelines for restoring the quality of the Great Lakes. This was accomplished
by detailing a general process through which the "problem areas", now termed Areas of
Concern (AOCs), should be addressed. The AOCs were identified as locations where GLWQA
objectives had been exceeded and such exceedance had caused, or was likely-to cause,
impairment of beneficial use or the area's ability to support aquatic life (United States and
Canada, 1987). Impairment of beneficial use has been defined as a change in the chemical,
physical or biological integrity of the Great Lakes System sufficient to cause any of the following:
restrictions on fish and wildlife consumption,
tainting of fish and wildlife flavor,
degradation of fish and wildlife populations,
fish tumors or other deformities,
bird or animal deformities or reproductive problems,
degradation of benthos,
restrictions on dredging activities,
eutrophication or undesirable algae,
restrictions on drinking water consumption, or taste and odor problems,
beach closings,
-------
degradation of aesthetics,
added costs to agriculture or industry,
degradation of phytoplankton and zooplankton populations,
loss of fish and wildlife habitat,
(United States and Canada, 1987).
The defined AOCs included rivers, connecting channels, harbors and embayments, with
the responsibility of remediating these areas falling upon the state and provincial governments
within the US and Canada. The WQB officially determines the AOCs, but the specific boundaries
of the AOCs are set by the states and/or provincia governments. Originally there were 42 AOCs
designated by the WQB; 12 were ths responsibility of Canada, 25 of the US and 5 were the joint
responsibility of both countries. Since then, one more site has been added to the US list, for a
present total of 26. All considered, there are 43 AOCs that are in the process of being
remediated (Figure 1).
More assistance was needed in order to define the methods by which the remediation
of these AOCs should proceed to fulfill the obligation to the GLWQA. In 1985, in order to provide
more uniform guidance to the states, the WQB introduced the idea of a Remedial Action Plan
(RAP) and developed a scenario flow chart to help the states with the decision-making process.
This problem solving flow chart was comprised of the following six categories (Hartig and
Thomas, 1988):
1. Causative factors are unknown and there is no investigative program underway to
identify causes.
2. Causative factors are unknown and an investigative program is underway to identify
causes.
3. Causative factors known, but remedial action plan not developed.
4. Causative factors known and remedial action plan developed, but remedial measures
not fully implemented.
5. Causative factors known, remedial action plan developed, and all remedial measures
identified in plan have been fully implemented.
6. Confirmation that uses have been restored and deletion as an Area of Concern.
These categories more clearly outlined for the states the steps through which an AOC had to
move in order to be classified as completely remediated.
Central to this flow chart was the development of a RAP that would address specific use
impairments and help restore and protect the environment by using an ecosystem approach.
The WQB provided some basic guidance for the creation of a RAP and recommended that the
remedial plans include these points (United States and Canada, 1987):
1. A definition and detailed description of the environmental problem in the AOC, including
a definition of the beneficial uses that are impaired, the degree of impairment and the
geographic extent of such impairment.
2. A definition of the causes of the use impairment, including a description of all known
sources of pollutants involved and an evaluation of other possible sources.
3. An evaluation of remedial measures in place.
4. An evaluation of alternative additional measures to restore beneficial uses.
5. A selection of additional remedial measures to restore beneficial uses and a schedule for
their implementation.
6. An identification of the persons or agencies responsible for implementation of remedial
measures.
-------
Figure 1: International Joint Commis;
Areas of Concern
MILWAUKEE ESTUAfw
WAUK£GAN HARBOR
-------
7. A process for evaluating remedial measure implementation and effectiveness.
8. A description of surveillance and monitoring processes to track the effectiveness of
remedial measures and the eventual confirmation of the restoration of uses.
These recommendations were part of the 1987 amendments to the GLWQA, along with
the division of the RAP process into three stages, Stage I, II and III, requiring submittal to the DC
at the end of each phase. The Stage I RAP must include the fore mentioned points 1 and 2. This
initial phase of the RAP process is designed to provide a characterization of the AOCs' ambient
environment and a description of its problems. A Stage II RAP should include points 3 through 7
and will constitute the development, implementation and evaluation of remedial actions. Lastly,
the Stage III RAP must contain point 8 and is intended to be an evocation of the improvement
measures that have been identified in Stage II as well as RAP implementation. All three stages
of RAP development require a cooperative effort between federal, state and local government
employees, business representatives, non-governmental organizations and the local citizens.
The level of participation and commitment within the AOC, in most cases, should parallel the
degree of remedial action that can be achieved.
One of the major problems facing the AOCs today is toxic substance contamination of
the sediments. Years of industrial and municipal discharges, combined sewer overflows and
urban and agricultural non-point source runoff have contributed to the creation of vast and
highly polluted sediments that pose serious human and ecological health concerns. The
bioaccumulation of sediment pollutants in fish is one way for humans to become affected by the
in place contaminants. The toxics increase in concentration at every level of the food chain, from
the benthos, to the fish and finally, to humans. Of the 43 AOCs, 42 have problems with
sediments contaminated by toxic substances and 38 have health advisories issued for human
consumption of fish.
In an attempt to focus efforts on the issue of contaminated sediments, in the 1987
amendments to the Clean Water Act, Congress authorized the US Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO) to coordinate and conduct a 5-
year study and demonstration project relating to the appropriate treatment of toxic pollutants in
bottom sediments. Five areas were specified by Congress as requiring priority consideration in
conducting demonstration projects: Ashtabula River, Ohio; Buffalo River, New York; Grand
Calumet River, Indiana; Saginaw Bay, Michigan; and Sheboygan Harbor, Wisconsin. To fulfill
the requirements of this Congressional mandate, GLNPO initiated the Assessment and
Remediation of Contaminated Sediments (ARCS) Program. ARCS is an integrated program for
the development and testing of remedial action alternatives for contaminated sediments.
Information from the ARCS program activities will be used to assist in the decision-making of
sediment remedial activities, and provide guidance for the development of RAPs for the 43
AOCs (USEPA GLNPO, 1992). It is intended that most of the outputs from the ARCS Program will
be available by the end of the calendar year.
Presently, in the US, 8 states are involved in the RAP process: Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota
and Pennsylvania each have 1 AOC, Ohio has 4, Wisconsin has 5, New York has 6 and
Michigan has 14. Of these AOCs, 2 are the joint responsibility of two states, while the
remediation of the 5 connecting channels is shared by both the US and Canada. All of the US
AOCs have impaired beneficial uses attributable to contaminated sediments.
This report will address the challenges of sediment remediation within the 29 US AOCs,
7
-------
and are presented based upon the state having the lead in the remedial process. For each site
the following information is included (if available):
site location
contaminants polluting sediments
volume of contaminants or contaminated sediments
fish consumption advisories
enforcement history relating to Superfund sites
dredging history not related to Superfund actions
technical tools in use or needed
state requests for information and resources
Additionally, Appendix A contains a summary of the impaired beneficial uses in all US AOCs
and Appendix B is a list of the state and federal RAP coordinators who contributed information
and/or requests for this report. It is worthwhile to mention that the state requests contained in
this report are in no way indicative of the priorities the states have set in their remedial efforts
but are merely suggestions, or "wish list ideas", relating only to the issue of contaminated
sediments.
Another point to clarify involves the issue of sediment criteria and the ongoing question of
how the states are to determine what is and what is not considered "contaminated". For the
purposes of this report, the only guidelines referred to are the 1977 guidelines for the pollutional
classification of Great Lakes Harbor sediments that were developed by U5EPA Region V. These
guidelines were developed due to an obvious need to make immediate decisions regarding the
disposal of dredged material and have not been adequately related to the impact of the
sediments on the Great Lakes. These are considered interim guidelines and will be used only
until more scientifically sound guidelines are developed (U5EPA Region V, 1977). They are used
in this report to give a general indication of the characterization of the sediments in the AOCs by
using the categories of "nonpolluted", "moderately polluted" and "highly polluted". However, it
should be kept in mind that absolute confidence is not placed in these guidelines and major
remedial decisions are usually not based upon findings using these guidelines. It is also
important to note that most of the concentrations presented in this report are maximum values
from limited sampling efforts and do not represent average concentrations within the Areas of
Concern. Additionally, changing technologies and lower detection limits place constraints on the
comparisons that can be drawn between recent data and 1970's data.
The most current information was compiled in an effort to provide an overview of the
sediment remediation issues that the AOCs are confronting, and to provide federal, state and
local RAP decision-makers with a summary of past, present and future sediment activities to
assist in accelerating and strengthening the process toward future remediation. It is not
intended for this report to be a comparison of the efforts that are being put forth by any of the
states, but should instead be viewed only as a means of sharing information that may benefit
all involved parties. As a final note, though this report focuses mostly on Superfund clean-up
activities, it should be kept in mind that Superfund is just one tool available for remediation. The
importance of state enforcement, RCRA actions, non-enforcement and cooperative agreements
should not be underestimated. In some cases, the effectiveness and timeliness of cooperative
clean-up activities may be the most efficient way to remediate contaminated sediments within
Areas of Concern.
8
-------
DESCRIPTIONS
OF
SITES
-------
Illinois
Waukegan Harbor
Location of Site
Illinois' only AOC, Waukegan Harbor, is located on the western shore of Lake Michigan,
approximately 37 miles north of Chicago and 10 miles south of the Illinois-Wisconsin border. The
harbor is roughly 37 acres in size and has an average depth of about 20 feet, the decision
concerning the official boundaries of the AOC has resulted in an ongoing disagreement
between the citizens advisory group and the state. The citizens advisory group wonted to
expand the AOC so that it would be bounded by the Dead River on the north, the bluff line
which parallels Sheridan Road on the west, the southern boundary of the former US Steel
property on the south and the Lake Michigan nearshore on the east. However, this has not
been agreed to by the State of Illinois and the official AOC presently includes only the harbor.
The area that is under dispute is referred to as the "Waukegan Expanded Study Area" (E5A)
and is addressed in the Stage I RAP along with the official AOC (Figure 2).
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Waukegan Harbor was originally designated as an AOC due to high levels of
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) in the harbor sediments. Today, pollutants of concern in the
sediments also include Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Cyanide, Iron, Lead,
Manganese, Nickel, Phosphorous, Kjeldahl Nitrogen and Volatile Solids. Additionally,
Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) and Phenols are present at a former General
Motors Coke Plant and at the Waukegan tar pit.
The level of contamination was determined through chemical analysis of sediment
samples collected in 1987 and 1990 at seven stations within the Waukegan Harbor and ESA. A
summary of the findings is as follows (Hey and Associates, Inc., 1992):
1. The upper harbor had the highest number of parameters signifying "heavy pollution"
with 11, followed by central harbor with 8, Slip 1 with 5, new harbor with 3 and the
harbor channel with 1. Heavily polluted levels of Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper,
Cyanide, Iron, Kjeldahl Nitrogen, Lead, Nickel, Phosphorous, Volatile Solids and Zinc
were found, while levels of Barium, Manganese and PCBs were determined to be
moderately polluted (U5EPA Region V, 1977).
2. The highest levels of PCBs were obtained from Slip 3 (Figure 3). The maximum
concentrations of PCBs found were: 17,251 ppm (1985,420 ppm (1987), 10,000 and
12,220 ppm( 1990).
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
Roughly 700,000 pounds of PCBs were estimated to be in the soils on the Outboard
Marine Corporation (OMC) property. Within the Waukegan Harbor sediments however,
300,000 pounds of PCBs were estimated to be present. Recent OMC dredging has resulted in
the removal of a substantial amount of the contamination from this site. Within Waukegan
Harbor and Slip 3 approximately 32,000 and 6,300 cubic yards of PCB contaminated
sediments were respectively dredged. Additionally, about 3,800 cubic yards of PCB
contaminated soils and sediment were dredged from the Crescent Ditch, around 2,900 cubic
yards from the Oval Lagoon and approximately 5,000 cubic yards from the North Ditch. The
remaining volume of contaminants is not currently known but will be determined during the
follow up sampling and will be addressed by the Stage II RAP.
-------
Figure 2: Regional Location of the Waukegan Expanded Study Area
BPMCED STUDY AflEA
WAUKEQAN
LAKE
MICHIGAN
-------
Figure 3: Extent of PCB contamination In and Around Waukegan
Harbor (also locations of Slip 1 and Slip 3).
CRESCENT
DITCH
LAKE
MICHIGAN
OVAL LAGOON
NORTH DITCH I
OMC PLANT 2
LARSEN MARINE
WAUKECAN
NORTH BEACH
NATIONAL
GYPSUM
OMC PLANT 1
WAUKECAN
CENTRAL BEACH
INNER
HARBOR
WAUKECAN
If ATER
TREATUEN
PLANT
NORTH PIER
NORTH BREAKWATER
WAUKEQAM HMVOR ENTRANCE CHANNEL
OUTER HARBOR
***" $ 4= $ i GOVERNMENT PIER
i 1 II II « I - • - •
NEW HARBOR
ROCK BREAKWATER
OVCT wo mi
CBfTIU
I 10 AM) UOFPU
-------
Fish Consumption Advisories
In 1981, the U5EPA recommended that fish caught in Waukegan Harbor not be eaten.
The basis for this recommendation was obtained from two types of studies completed by EPA to
determine the extent of PCB contamination in fish. In the first study, 16 random samples of fish
were collected and their PCB content was measured. All but 1 of the samples exceeded the 2
ppm US Food and Drug Administration (U5FDA) guideline. The average concentration of all
samples was 18 ppm. For the second study, uncontaminated fish were exposed for 30 days to
water from Slip 3 in the harbor and were then placed in open lake water for an additional 84
days. The 30-day exposure to harbor water resulted in 20 ppm PCB levels in bluegills and "! /
ppm levels in yellow perch. Even after the 84-day exposure to cleaner open Iclte water these
levels did not drop below 8 ppm (Hey and Associates, Inc., 1992). Presently, there are fish
consumption advisories for all fish species and the Lake County Health Department has posted
a warning for the harbor area that the consumption of fish taken from the "north" portion of
Waukegan Harbor may be dangerous to human health (Hey and Associates, Inc., 1992).
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
For approximately 11 years (1961-1972), Outboard Marine Corporation (OMC)
purchased a PCB containing hydraulic fluid used in die-casting work. Some of the PCBs
escaped through floor drains and were ultimately discharged to Waukegan Harbor. The
harbor area discharge was located in the western edge of Slip 3, and in 1975 and 1976 high
concentrations of PCBs were found in the sediments in this area. An initial investigation of the
Waukegan Harbor sediments was made by Superfund in 1977, and was followed by more
thorough investigations, a Feasibility Study (FS) and a Record of Decision (ROD). Following some
remedial action, litigation, negotiations and a consent decree, construction on the remedy at the
site began on November 15,1990. The dean-up plans involved the dredging of parts of the
harbor, the building of containment cells for less contaminated soils and sediments, the
extraction of PCBs from the soil and finally, the thermal treatment of the sediments with PCB
concentrations greater than 500 ppm. As of August, 1993, the construction of the new slip and
the dredging of the sediments was completed.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
Both the inner and the outer areas of Waukegan Harbor are affected by sediment
accumulation that is estimated to be between 1 and 10 feet thick. In order to keep the harbor
accessible for navigational purposes the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE3 has dredged the
outer areas of Waukegan Harbor as recently as 1991 (Hey and Associates, Inc., 1992). The
dredged materials removed from these areas were clean sandy sediments, suitable for open
lake disposal or for use as nourishment materials for beaches. However, dredging of the inner
portions of Waukegan harbor, west of North Pier, was discontinued after 1972. The sediment
classification of "polluted" has prevented further dredging in the inner harbor areas. This is an
issue that will be addressed through the Stage II RAP process.
Technical Tools in Use or Needed
Since the OMC remedial work has been completed, there is a need to do follow up
monitoring and assess the present status of the sediments. It is important to answer the
question, "How clean is the harbor now?" This will involve a recharacterization of the sediment
situation after which the data will be used to plan the next step toward complete remediation of
Waukegan Harbor.
10
-------
State Requests
Since the dredging has been completed at the OMC site, the Waukegan Harbor AOC is
now in need of financial help to fund the follow up monitoring. Specifically, fish monitoring will be
very important in order to determine whether or not the advisory can be lifted. Additionally,
water and sediment sampling and monitoring will be equally important in order to help with the
next remedial decision.
11
-------
Indiana
Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Canal
Location of Site
The Grand Calumet River is located at the southern end of Lake Michigan in northwest
Indiana and flows for 13 miles through the heavily industrialized cities of Gary, East Chicago and
Hammond into Lake Michigan. The AOC, 15 miles south of downtown Chicago, includes the
east branch of the river, a small segment of the west branch and the Indiana Harbor Canal.
The defined boundaries of the Grand Calumet AOC are Interstate 80/94 on the south, the state
line on the west, the Lake/Porter county line on the east and Indiana's boundary on Lake
Michigan into the water (Figure 4). The land use around the Indiana Harbor is heavily
industrialized primarily as a large steel production and processing center. Northwest Indiana
produces more steel than any other region in the US and maintains the largest US petroleum
refinery. It is also worthwhile to note that this AOC has different and much larger problems than
all other AOCs because the political and public backing have historically not been supportive of
issues concerning northwest Indiana.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Due to the vast amount of industrial activity centered around the Grand Calumet River,
the condition of the AOC has been degraded so severely that it is considered by many to be the
most seriously polluted of all 43 AOCs. Throughout the years, a very high environmental price
has been paid by this area in order to provide the nation with machinery, automobiles and
farming equipment. Presently, 90% of the Grand Calumet River's flow is discharged from
industrial sources and sewage treatment plants.
A substantial amount of bottom sediments in the river and harbor are heavily
contaminated with PCBs, PAHs, heavy metals and conventional pollutants. Specifically, the
highest concentrations of certain contaminants found in the Grand Calumet River/Indiana
Harbor Canal (GCR/IHC) sediments are as follows (Simmers, J.W. et al., 1991):
Iron: 326,000 ppm Napthalene: 2,033.333+/-57.735 ppm
Lead: 1,430 ppm Benzo(a)pyrene: 105.667+/-16.921 ppm
Zinc 4,630 ppm Fluoranthene: 160.000 +/-10.000 ppm
Total PCBs: 102.3 ppm
Most recently, the Toxicity/Chemistry work group within the ARCS program determined
that out of the 3 priority sites tested (Buffalo River, Saginaw River and Grand Calumet River), the
Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Canal generally had the highest levels of sediment
contamination for all parameters. Additionally, all toxicity tests indicated high toxicity with the
benthic community strongly dominated by oligochaetes, a very pollutant tolerant species.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
The U5ACE has estimated that there is between 4.5 and 5.0 million cubic yards of
potentially contaminated sediment within the Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Canal AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
In 1985, there was a "no consumption" fishing advisory issued for the GCR/IHC AOC. It
was recommended that no species be eaten from these waters. Today, the advisory remains
in effect.
12
-------
Figure 4: Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Canal Area of Concern
Northwestern Indiana
21012
6BK
(8oun»: MortftwMtam ImUunt fl*fltoo*/ Ptonntng Comlulon)
BETHLEHEM
STEEL
-------
Enforcement History Relating to Suoerfund Sites
Currently, there is no remediation of contaminated sediments occurring in conjunction
with any of the Superfund sites in the Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Canal AOC.
However, major enforcement actions with 4 sites in the AOC will have a significant impact upon
the contaminated sediment situation and are worthy of mention.
In order to address the issues involved in ecosystem remediation of the GCR/1HC, the
USEPA initiated lawsuits against several industrial and municipal sources of contamination to the
AOC. The goals were to enforce existing environmental laws, and to make the responsible
parties remediate c amage that had been done to the GCR/IHC ecosystem. Some of the
settlements required responsible parties to dredge and dispose of contaminated sediments
located within the AOC. The results of 4 of the lawsuits will directly influence the remediation of
contaminated sediments. The responsible parties include US Steel Gary Works (USX), LTV Steel,
Gary Sanitary District and Inland Steel Corporation. It should be kept in mind that only the
portions of the settlements pertaining to contaminated sediments are discussed below,
however, the entire settlements required much more remedial activity than is reported here.
The enforcement action against US Steel Gary Works (USX) was resolved in October,
1988 and was a result of violations of the Clean Water Act. The settlement stated that USX had
to spend $17.5 million investigating approximately 13 miles of sediment in the GCR and
remediating the sediments in a 5-mile stretch near USX's property. To date, USX has
completed the sediment characterization study for the 13 mile stretch. The study showed that
sediments contain heavy metals associated with the steel industry, such as Cadmium,
Chromium, Iron, Lead and Zinc. The sediment is also contaminated with oil and grease, PCBs,
PAHs, benzene, Cyanide and sulfates. The study concluded that there are about 475,000 cubic
yards of contaminated sediment in the 5-mile stretch of the GCR from the river's headwaters to
the Gary Sanitary District outfall. USX must clean up these sediments. Additionally, results of
certain sludge tests on the contaminated sediments showed concentrations of lead as high as
800,000 ppm in certain areas.
Actions against LTV Steel were pursued for their violations of the Clean Water Act also.
The results of this settlement, in May of 1992, were that LTV must do a three phase project to
remove oil and clean-up sediments in the water intake channel. USEPA estimates that a
minimum of 30,000 cubic yards of sediment will be remediated at a cost of S3 million. Currently,
LTV's sediment remediation plan is under review by USEPA Region V.
The enforcement action taken against Gary Sanitary District was a result of repeated
violations of the Clean Water Act. A settlement was reached in October 1992, in which the
Sanitary District agreed to provide $1.7 million to clean-up sediments in the GCR. This project
will supplement and enlarge the sediment project being carried out by USX.
Violations of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, led to enforcement action against the Inland Steel
Corporation. The settlement in March 1993, required Inland to spend 519 million to address
contaminated sediments in a 3-mile stretch of the Indiana Harbor and Ship Canal next to
Inland's property. At least $17.5 million must be spent on clean-up. EPA currently estimates that
between 400,000 and 700,000 cubic yards may be cleaned up. To date, no remedial activity
has commenced.
13
-------
Dredging History Not Related to Suoerfund Actions
Due to environmental concerns and the ACE's inability to find an acceptable location for
the dredged sediment, the harbor has not been dredged in many years. The USAGE has
determined that over 1.2 million cubic yards need to be dredged from the Federal Navigation
Channel of IHC. This effort is critical because it will abate the annual movement of 150,000 cubic
yards of contaminated material from the harbor to Lake Michigan. Currently, this dredging is
being held up since there are problems with disposal of dredge spoil. In the past, volume and
contamination of sediment in the Harbor and Canal stopped the USAGE efforts to locate and
construct a suitable confined disposal site for dredged materials. The ACE is presently
developing a Environmental Impact Statement (E1S) for dredging of the Federal Navigation
Channel, and is analyzing the Energy Cooperative, Inc. site as a possible location for a CDF.
In addition to the USAGE activities, the Hammond Sanitary District tentatively agreed to
dredge 428,000 cubic yards from the west branch of the Grand Calumet River. However, the
State of Indiana denied Hammond's request for dredge spoil disposal on land.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
As one of the 5 ARCS priority sites, a baseline human health risk assessment was
performed for the GCR/IHC. The results are summarized as follows (Crane, J.L. (1), 1992):
1. The only dermal exposure risk estimate that approached a level of concern was the
cara'nogenic risk resulting from dermal exposure to IHC sediment porewater under the
reasonable maximum exposure. These risk estimates were only calculated for children
and teenagers in the 7 to 17 year old age group. It was assumed that contaminants in
the sediment porewater would come in contact with the skin when someone stepped
into the sediments barefoot or dipped their hands into the sediments.
2. The only noncarcinogenic risk estimate that reached a level of concern was for the
consumption of whole carp collected from the IHC under a reasonable maximum
exposure scenario.
3. The carcinogenic risk resulting from the consumption of fish was at or above levels of
concern for all fish species and sites except for pumpkinseed collected from the GCR.
Additionally, the carcinogenic risk from consuming whole carp from either the GCR, IHC
or Indiana Harbor was almost identical.
Additionally, Grand Calumet River sediments have been recently used in a
demonstration project performed jointly under the ARCS Program and the Superfund innovative
Technology Evaluation (SITE) Program. The demonstration test used 2 composited sediments (A
and B) collected from the GCR, and tested the technical and economic aspects of the Resources
Conservation Company (RCC) pilot-scale Basic Extractive Sludge Treatment (B.E.S.T.) solvent
extraction system. The following conclusions are a few of the project findings, and are based on
the demonstration test results collected by the SITE program and supported by other available
data, including demonstration test data collected by RCC (SAIC 4,1993):
1. Contaminant concentration reductions of 96% for PAHs and greater than 99% of PCBs
were achieved for sediment A. Contaminant concentration reductions of greater than
99% for PAHs and 99% for PCBs were achieved for sediment B.
2. Removal efficiencies in excess of 98% were realized by both sediments for oil and
grease.
14
-------
State Requests
Presently, the most important issue mentioned by the State for the GCR/IHC AOC is to get
the results from the ACE EIS. If these results do not become available, the State will then have to
duplicate the work at a large cost before any remedial action can take place. After the EIS is
released, it will be much easier for responsible parties to move ahead with contaminated
sediment remediation. The EIS was scheduled to be completed by the late summer of 1993.
15
-------
Michigan
Clinton River
Location of Site
Located in southeastern Michigan, just north of Detroit, is the Clinton River. The river flows
80 miles from its headwaters to Lake St. Clair near Mt. Clemens. Before entering Lake St. Clair,
the river flows through a natural channel and a manmade spillway. The Clinton River AOC
includes the spillway and the main branch of the river, downstream of Red Run (Figure 5). The
AOC covers approximately 19 miles; 17 miles of the river and 2 miles of the spillway. Land use
in the AOC is entirely urban with the main industries being automotive related. However, on the
north branch of the river, the land use is agricultural.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Sediments within the Clinton River AOC are contaminated with PCBs, heavy metals, oil
and grease. The heavy metals of concern include Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Lead,
Nickel and Zinc. PCBs have been detected at levels up to 11.4 ppm in the sediments
downstream of Mt. Clemens (MDNR 1,1988).
Very little characterization of the sediments within the AOC has been performed. Most
attention has been focused on the federal navigation channel, so the information concerning the
navigation channel is current, but data related to either side of the channel is lacking.
Characterization of sediments outside the dredged channel is definitely needed.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimates have yet been calculated for the volume of contaminated sediments within
the Clinton River AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Within the Clinton River AOC there is a fish consumption advisory for carp due to the
presence of PCBs in the sediments. A caged fish study was conducted for one month in 1989 to
evaluate fish uptake levels of PCB at both the mouth of the Clinton River and the Clinton spillway.
After 27 days, channel catfish from both locations accumulated low levels of PCBs. Another
caged fish study was completed in 1992 and results should be available by September 1993.
These studies may be used to confirm the necessity of the consumption advisory and to obtain a
better indication of the magnitude of the PCB problem.
Enforcement History Relating to Suoerfund Sites
There are 5 Superfund landfills that have been identified in the Clinton River watershed, 4
of which are located within the AOC. The 4 sites are: Liquid Disposal Inc., G&H Landfill, J&L
Landfill and South Macomb Disposal #9. All four of these sites have completed the RI/F5 phase
and are at various stages of clean-up and agreements with PRPs. It has been determined that
none of these sites are impacting the river and therefore, no remediation of the sediments within
the AOC is occurring in conjunction with any Superfund actions. Currently, there are no plans to
remediate any river sediments.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
Dredging within this AOC has recently been performed by the USAGE and the Macomb
County Public Works Commission (MCPWC). Due to the ineffective spillway weir, sediment
16
-------
Figure 5: Clinton River Area of Concern, including the spillway weir, and River
Sections 1, 2 and 3. Portions of the Source Area of Concern, River
Sections 4, 5 and 6 are also shown.
^A-
—II K7>~< ^
r
SECTIONS -1
co.
SECTION 4 /
-V'' '*
. » / V
• I •
• /
* y
i /
• /
I/
/
«
•-
Maj> 1 uCAllon
\
} x SECTION 2
nfefS
J | - |- - -. _p -iC
0 A. 9 1 a J
I.AKR ST.
— i
1 •
«
CI.AI
s
R
-------
deposits hove occurred across the natural river channel at the confluence with the spillway,
diverting much of the river flow down the spillway channel. In an attempt to correct this
problem, the MCPWC completed the removal of sediment deposits in November of 1990. The
dredged sediments were disposed of in a CDF. There is also a proposed project to modify the
spillway weir that may involve the removal of more sediments. This needs to be done in order
to insure that the appropriate river flows are maintained.
In addition to the MCPWC dredging, from October 23, 1991, to November 18, 1992, the
USAGE removed approximately 99,000 cubic yards from the navigation channel. This dredge
spoil was placed in the new CDF that was completed in 1989. This new CDF is located 150 feet
from the river and is 37 acres in size.
Technical Tools in Use or Needed
Most of the efforts concerning the sediments within the Clinton River AOC have been from
dredging activities. A modification of the spillway weir is proposed. Other than work involving
the spillway, little has yet been done to assess where this AOC is in the remediation process.
Completion of the Stage II RAP (with updates for the Stage I RAP) is scheduled for 1995. Work
groups have been decided upon and one of the groups is focused on contaminated sediments.
Characterization of the sediments in the AOC on the outside of the navigation channel is needed.
State Requests
The Clinton River RAP Committee needs time to get the work groups moving so that
decisions can be made and the sediment situation addressed. They are going to need help
with funding the sediment characterization work of the AOC on both sides of the navigation
channel and farther up the river. Once some data is obtained and assessed by the
contaminated sediment work group, remedial decisions can be considered and remedial
actions implemented.
Deer Lake/Carp River/Carp Creek
Location of Site
Deer Lake is located in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, northwest of the city of
Ishpeming, near the shore of Lake Superior. The Carp River connects Deer Lake to Lake
Superior. The AOC includes all 907 acres of Deer Lake, 20 miles of the Carp River and Carp
Creek, a tributary stream that flows into Deer Lake. Land use around this AOC is 96% forested
with a few industrial areas from past iron ore and gold mining activities.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Sediments in the AOC are highly contaminated with heavy metals including Chromium,
Copper, Lead, Zinc and especially Mercury. It was estimated by MDNR that 30 pounds of
Mercury per year were discharged into the sewer system every year for approximately 52
years. The highest concentrations of Mercury (10 to 15 ppm) were found off the Carp Creek Inlet
(MDNR 2, 1987). All sources of Mercury, except for atmospheric loadings, were eliminated in
1981.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimates are available for the volume of contaminated sediment within the Deer
Lake AOC.
17
-------
Rsh Consumption Advisories
Rsh consumption and health advisories were issued for the AOC in 1981 and 1982. The
advisories were based upon the discovery that fish in Deer Lake were contaminated with
Mercury in excess of the USFDA action level of 1.0 ppm wet weight and the State of Michigan
Consumption Advisory level of .5 ppm (MDNR 2, 1987). The advisories remain in effect for all
species.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
There are no federal Superf und sites within this AOC. However, in order to understand
the challenges of remediation for the Deer Lake AOC, it is important to look at the history of
contamination.
The major sources of pollution are believed to have been discharges of Mercury from the
old Ishpeming Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) and Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs).
The Cleveland Cliffs Iron Company (CCI) laboratories was responsible for the Mercury
discharges that the Ishpeming WWTP received. The CCI Company maintained two Mercury
laboratories in the city of Ishpeming which used Mercuric Chloride in ore assays and research.
After being used, the spent reagents were poured down the drains that were connected to the
sewer system. Between the two labs this activity occurred over a period of 52 years (MDNR 2,
1987).
A consent judgment was signed between CCI and MDNR in 1984 that held CCI
financially responsible for the restoration and monitoring of Deer Lake. The remediation of Deer
Lake involved the following actions: drawing down the lake to the lowest possible level,
stabilizing the water levels near the top of the dam so as not to stir the sediments, leaving the
mercury contaminated sediments in place to be covered during the process of natural
sedimentation, killing all mercury contaminated fish and restocking, and lastly, monitoring fish,
sediment and water for 10 years. These remedial actions were completed in 1986 and the
monitoring is in progress until 1996 at which time CCI has to do extensive sampling of the
Mercury levels in the fish and benthos to determine if a healthy ecosystem has been restored.
Dredging History not Related to Superfund Actions
No dredging has ever occurred within this AOC.
Technical Tools in Use or Needed
Currently there is annual monitoring of Mercury levels in fish that will continue through
1996. In 1996, CCI will have to perform more extensive sampling of the fish, sediment and
benthos to determine if the Mercury levels have decreased to a point where it is no longer
available to the aquatic wildlife or water column. It would be helpful to perform a study of
bottom dwelling biota to obtain an updated look at the health and diversity of the benthic
region. There is interest in monitoring eagles and other wildlife for Mercury, but this has
received no funding and will probably not be done.
State Requests
There are no requests for additional help at the present time because the remedial
strategy is to wait on further remedial decisions until after the results of the extensive 1996
sampling is available. At that time there may be an extensive "wish list" to help complete the
restoration of the Deer Lake AOC.
18
-------
Detroit River
Location of Site
The Detroit River, 32 miles in length, connects Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie and serves as
part of the international boundary between Canada and the US. This river is the lowest link of
the Upper Great Lakes connecting channels, conveying water from Lakes Michigan, Superior
and Huron to Lake Erie. The physical boundary of the Detroit River AOC is the Detroit River, from
Windmill Point to the Detroit Light (Figure 8) Fifteen tributaries discharge into the AOC, with the
largest being the Rouge River, an AOC in itself. A major use of the Detroit River is as an
industrial and drinking water supply. The river supplies approximately 25 industries with
process or cooling water. Additionally, there are 7 municipal drinking water intakes serving
around 4 million people in nearly TOO communities within the AOC watershed (MDNR and OME,
1990). Shoreline use in Michigan is 61% industrial, versus 33% for the Ontario shoreline, while
31% of the Ontario shoreline is residential and 22% recreational, compared to 16% residential
and 6% recreational for Michigan.
The Detroit River RAP is being developed jointly by the Ontario Ministry of the Environment
(OME) and MDNR, with Michigan bearing the major responsibility.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
It is believed that the Detroit River sediments have likely been accumulating contaminants
since the AOC became industrialized (MDNR and OME, 1990). Today, sediments in the
nearshore areas are heavily polluted with metals, PCBs, Cyanide and other organics. Heavy
metals of concern include Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese,
Mercury, Nickel and Zinc. The following ranges of contaminants were developed from 9 studies
and were presented in the Detroit River RAP:
Arsenic ,86to36ppm Cadmium: .Ito41ppm
Chromium: 4 to 680 ppm Copper .5 to 280 ppm
Cyanide: less than detect to 15.7 ppm Iron: 2600 to 180,000 ppm
Lead: non-detect to 810 ppm Mercury: less than detect to 55.8 ppm
Nickel: 3 to 300 ppm Zinc 6 to 53,000 ppm
PCBs: below detect to 40 ppm oil and grease-. 20 to 47,226 ppm
Most of the sediments sampled along the entire Ml shoreline were classified as "heavily" or
"moderately polluted" based upon 1977 USEPA guidelines (USEPA Region V, 1977).
As for a characterization of the sediment situation, there are "hot spots" of PCBs and "hot
spots" of metals, downriver from the steel industry discharge areas. Additionally, the Michigan
shoreline from the Rouge River southward through the Trenton Channel appears to have the
greatest overall contaminant levels. Generally, contaminant concentrations are substantially
higher along the Michigan shoreline where there is widespread, significant contamination, as
compared to the mid-river and Ontario shoreline sectors.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimates are currently available as to the volume of contaminated sediments within
the Detroit River AOC. Some approximations may soon be available in conjunction with specific
projects.
19
-------
Figure 8: The Detroit River Area of Concern
-------
Fish Consumption Advisories
The Detroit River currently has a restricted consumption advisory for freshwater drum
above 14" due to Mercury levels, and a no consumption advisory for carp due to PCBs. The
Canadian government has also issued a restricted consumption advisory for walleye over 18"
due to high levels of Mercury.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
No Superfund sites within the AOC are believed to be contaminating the sediments at
any significant levels.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
Maintenance dredging by the USAGE is constant within the Detroit River harbor areas.
All dredge spoil is currently disposed of at the Pointe Mouillee CDF. In addition to the ACE
dredging, there has been recent marina dredging near Elizabeth Park. This dredging was
conducted by Wayne County in 1993 and the dredge spoil was disposed of at an upland site.
There are now plans to monitor and study this site to determine the rate of re-sedimentation
and re-establishment of the benthic community. This will hopefully provide an indication of the
recovery or recontamination potential of the river in its present state.
Technical Tools in Use or Needed
Currently there are many different sediment related activities being implemented in the
Detroit River AOC. The purpose of these activities is to build the data base so it supports the
Detroit River as an area for the application of technology developed under the ARCS program.
In order to develop this data base, efforts are first being focused on the Trenton Channel,
instead of the Detroit River as a whole, because this channel is highly polluted and has all the
characteristics of the Detroit River within a much smaller area. The Trenton Channel is located in
the lower river between Grosse Isle and the Ml mainland and is approximately 8 miles in length.
It is hoped that through extensive sampling and other baseline work that a very detailed mass
balance model for Trenton Channel can be run for various scenarios. These scenarios should
then indicate the possibility of obtaining any benefits from different remedial options . The
information and procedures used on the Trenton Channel could then be applied to the entire
Detroit River (Benzie, 1993).
To make this process more manageable, these efforts within the Detroit River AOC have
been divided into short-term and long-term goals. The short-term goals involve the
identification and remediation of the "hot spots" and the collection of baseline information for the
Trenton Channel, while the long-term goals include the performance of mass balances on the
Trenton Channel and the Detroit River. Data needs for the mass balance models will include:
mapping of soft sediments, re-suspension measurements, bathymetric changes and
contaminant analyses (Benzie, 1993).
Other work in relation to the sediment situation within the Detroit River AOC involves the
C50 Toxics Demonstration Project that is to develop a single empirical model which can be used
to predict the contribution of toxicants from the CSOs. This will be important information for the
Detroit River mass balance model. Additionally, the contaminated sediment data that was
presented in the Stage (RAP is being updated using Geographic Information Systems (CIS). This
is intended to give a more accurate depiction of the contaminated sediment situation in the
Detroit River.
20
-------
State Requests
An important goal within this AOC is to compile enough information and baseline studies
to reach a level for consideration as an ARCS demonstration site. In order to get to that point,
assistance with funding parts of the Trenton Channel mass balance modeling effort is needed.
It would also help the State if the resources were available to do a much larger study on CSOs.
This would involve better monitoring and modeling that would assist in pinpointing which loads
need to be controlled first. Lastly, a more accurate estimate of the effects of storm water runoff
on the contaminated sediments would also help in moving this AOC forward in the remediation
process.
Kalamazoo River
location of Site
The Kalamazoo River is located in the southwestern portion of the Lower Peninsula of
Michigan. The river flows in a westerly direction and discharges into Lake Michigan near the city
of Saugatuck. The original designation of the AOC included only the lower 28 miles of the river,
but currently, the AOC includes the lower 80 miles of the river. The area upstream of the AOC is
heavily industrialized and includes several large paper companies. The principal sources of
pollution in this AOC are these large paper companies. The source area for the PCB
contamination has been identified as the Kalamazoo River from Calkins Dam to the city of
Kalamazoo and Portage Creek, a tributary to the Kalamazoo River in Kalamazoo (Figure 9).
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
PCBs are the identified pollutants of concern in the Kalamazoo River AOC sediments.
Highlighted in the Kalamazoo Stage I RAP (Draft) were 8 "hot spots" that were believed to
contain much of the pollution within the river: the Bryant Mill Pond area of Portage Creek in
Kalamazoo, the Plainwell impoundment, the Ostego impoundment, the Trowbridge
impoundment, Lake Allegan, the city of Allegan impoundment, a paper industry sludge
disposal area and the Ostego city dam impoundment (MDNR 3,1987). The following points
concerning the sediment situation were presented in the RAP (MDNR 3, 1987):
1. In the Kalamazoo River upstream of Calkins Dam to Kalamazoo, sediment PCB
concentrations were generally in the 10 to 30 ppm range in depositional areas.
However, at Portage Creek (Bryant Mill Pond) in Kalamazoo, sediment PCB
concentrations were generally in the TOO to 300 ppm range.
2. The highest concentrations of PCBs in the sediments were found in the Bryant Mill Ponds
and the Portage Creek area. An estimated 50% of the Bryant Mill Ponds data
exceeded the EPA action level of 50 ppm, while 38% of sediment data from Portage
Creek exceeded 50 ppm.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
It has been estimated that there are 230,000 pounds of PCBs in the depositional areas of
Lake Allegan, Plainwell, Trowbridge and Ostego impoundments and Bryant Mill Pond. MDNR
has also approximated that the lower portion of Bryant Pond contains 22,000 to 36,000 pounds
of PCBs. No final estimates of the total cubic yards of contaminated sediment within the
Kalamazoo River AOC are currently available.
Fish Consumption Advisories
As a result of PCB contamination, a fish consumption advisory, issued in 1977, is in effect
21
-------
H-
o
>
C/) O
o n>
(D 3
HJ (D
H- tr1
= O
O
n H>
ft
M H-
Ul O
• 3
t-o
(D i-h
tn O
rt
U
(D
N
O
O
JO
H-
<
fD
O
tD
-------
in the Kalamazoo River AOC for all species except walleye. Data from 1986 showed that
generally, the most contaminated species was carp, having an average total PCB concentration
of3.46ppm(MDNR3,1987).
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
The Kalamazoo River Superfund site encompasses roughly 80 miles of PCB
contaminated waterways, including banks, several impoundments and landfills. This site
attained Superfund status on August 31,1990. The State has identified 3 PRPs to date: Allied
Paper Incorporated/HM Holdings, Incorporated, Simpson (Plainwell) Paper Company and
Georgia Pacific Corporation. These PRPs own property that contains high concentrations of PCBs
in the soils and/or sediments which are believed to be contriuuting to the continuing
contamination of the Kalamazoo River.
The Superfund approach is not specifically focused on the 8 "hot spots" referred to in the
RAP, but instead involves an investigation of the entire river to (approximately) Lake Allegan.
Within the Superfund site there are 4 source areas, referred to as operable units (OUs), that are
landfills and are considered continuing sources of contamination to the river. The 4 OUs are:
King Highway Landfill, A-site Landfill, Willow Boulevard Landfill and the Bryant Mill Pond. These
OUs are being addressed very quickly and are currently in the remedial investigation phase.
Each of the 4 OUs has its own work plan and is on a faster track than the rest of the river. In
total, there are 5 work plans being implemented, one each for the 4 OUs and one for the entire
river. Remediation of the entire site will first focus on completing the RI/F5 which is estimated to
take another 2 and 1/2 years.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
No dredging of contaminated sediments has ever occurred within the Kalamazoo River
AOC.
Technical Tools in Use and Needed
Currently the activities within this AOC are centered on characterizing contamination, and
are specifically focused on mapping contamination. Later in the summer of 1993, a pilot study
of two methods to determine depositional areas and volume estimates is planned. The two
methods to be studied are Kriging (a geostatistical method) and dividing up the area into
transects and horizons (what is usually done at sediment sites). After the study is completed, the
best method or a combination of the two methods will be applied to the whole river.
Additionally, a biota sampling project has been started which will try to integrate into a model
the biological pathways and degree of biomagnification that is present within the AOC. The
model output will be used to develop an ecological risk assessment for the Kalamazoo River.
Within the Kalamazoo River AOC, the RAP process has just been re-initiated. Since
Superfund is taking the lead with the PCB issues, the RAP committee will address NPS pollution
to the river and will concentrate on the other beneficial use impairments not caused by
contaminated sediments.
State Requests
In general, it was suggested that it would be very helpful in remedial decision-making
for this AOC if new sediment criteria were established. Additionally, it was stated that it would
be helpful if an ARCS project was taken one step further and a full-scale demonstration
completed in lieu of doing different pilot studies.
22
-------
Specifically, for the Kalamazoo River AOC, funding is needed for programs to control
NPS agriculture sedimentation within the tributaries, and for the acquisition and restoration of
wildlife habitat. Restoration of habitats would only come after some criteria have been
developed to ensure there will be a healthy ecosystem.
Manistique River
Location of Site
The Manistique River flows into northern Lake Michigan from Michigan's Upper
Peninsula. The AOC is the lower 1.7 miles of the river and extends from below Manistique
Papers, Inc. to the Manistique Harbor and portions of nearshore Lake Michigan (Figure 10). The
AOC is located completely within the city of Manistique and most of the county is open,
underdeveloped land accounting for 98% of all land uses.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
In 4 studies conducted by EPA and MDNR, it was found that the sediments near the
Manistique Paper Company were extremely polluted with very high levels of PCBs and
contained moderately polluted levels of Chromium, Copper and Lead (SAIC 1,1987). In a 1985
EPA study, PCB concentrations ranging from 4.3 to 66 ppm were found along the northern
portion of an old de-inking lagoon located on Manistique Paper Company property. In
addition, extensive sampling by the USAGE in 1991 found PCB levels as high as 338 ppm in the
federal navigation channel, just outside of the Manistique River AOC. It was also found that the
high PCB levels were assoa'ated with the deposits of pulping material as opposed to the sandy
sediments. In July 1993 sampling by PRPs, PCB levels in the harbor navigation channel were
detected as high as 720 ppm.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
The volume of contaminated sediments within the Manistique River navigation channel is
currently estimated to be approximately 35,000 to 50,000 cubic yards.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Within the AOC there is a fish consumption advisory listed only for carp. Concentrations
were found in excess of both the U5FDA action level and the Michigan Consumption Advisory
level.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
Sources of pollution within the Manistique River AOC are Manistique Papers, Inc., Edison
Sault Electric and Warshawsky Brothers Iron and Metal. The Emergency Removal Branch is
presently investigating whether or not a contaminated sediment site within the AOC should be
placed on the NPL and/or emergency dredging performed.
Manistique Papers uses recycled paper as a raw material. In the 1960's, the company
used a lagoon located near the river to settle de-inking wastes. High concentrations of PCBs
have been found around the area of the lagoon during past sampling surveys. There have
been erosion problems with the contaminated soils on the lagoon banks. Properties owned by
Edison Sault Electric and Warshawsky Brothers are also believed to be sources of PCB
contamination to this site.
23
-------
Figure 10: Manistique^iRiver Area of Concern
MAMSTOUE WVER
STAlb FOREST
Manistique
Paper
Company
\
\
AOC Boundary
-------
Action was initially started on this site because the ACE did extensive sampling in 1990
and found high levels of PCBs. This in turn triggered DNR sampling in 1991 and 1992. After
becoming aware of this data, the Emergency Removal Branch of Superf und became involved
and named 3 PRPsto perform PCB sampling. This work was completed in June, 1993, and the
results were made available to the agencies and the PRP's. Based upon these studies a
determination will be made as to the need for emergency dredging and other remedial action.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
In the 1960's the USAGE dredged Manistique Harbor to maintain appropriate water
depths for navigation. At that time the sediments were open water disposed. The Manistique
Paper Company also dredged and backfilled the de-inking lagoon in the late 1970's and these
sediments were disposed of in the facility owned landfill.
Technical Tools in Use or Needed
At this time the Emergency Branch of EPA Superfund is dealing with the PCB "hot spots" in
this AOC by analyzing sampling data and assessing the need for emergency dredging. A
sediment study was also just completed by the USACE that provided contaminated sediment
volume estimates. The combined efforts of Superfund, PRPs and USACE should provide a better
characterization of the contamination throughout the AOC and provide the basis for decisions
concerning the next remedial actions.
State Requests
The Emergency Branch of Superfund is dealing with only the PCB "hot spots" and the
State would like to consider a more extensive removal. Since this site is only 90 acres in size it is
believed that the overall clean-up costs would be reduced if all the sediments in need of
dredging were removed in one effort. This way the site could be permanently remediated. It
was also suggested that Manistique would be a good site on which to perform removal and
disposal demonstration techniques. It is believed that this is an ideal site on which to test new
technologies because it is small, with a well-defined and serious problem.
Muskegon Lake
Location of Site
Muskegon Lake, 4,150 acres in size, is located on the eastern shore of Lake Michigan
near the city of Muskegon. This lake is a drowned river mouth that has been separated from
Lake Michigan by large sand dunes. The Muskegon Lake AOC includes the entire lake (Figure
11). Tributaries to this AOC include Bear Lake, Greens Creek, Ryerson Creek, Ruddiman Creek,
and, most importantly, the Muskegon River which flows through the lake and into Lake
Michigan. The immediate area is primarily residential and industrial, with petrochemical
companies, foundries, a pulp and paper mill and other industries located on the lake or within
its immediate watershed.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Muskegon Lake was originally designated as an AOC because, prior to 1973, the lake
received direct discharges of industrial "treated" process wastewater, municipal WWTP effluent,
CSOs and urban runoff. Additionally, the development of petroleum, chemical and heavy
industries in the area resulted in the contamination of groundwater. Because of these past
24
-------
Figure 11
AREA OF CONCERN: MUSKEGON LAKE
I
Lake
Michigan
-------
activities, the sediments of Muskegon Lake are contaminated with heavy metals such as
Arsenic, Chromium, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel and Zinc. The heavy metal concentrations
are fairly evenly distributed throughout the entire lake, with a few in localized areas near the
mouths of Ruddiman and Ryerson Creeks containing more elevated concentrations. Other
areas with elevated contaminant concentrations are also located in deeper zones of the AOC.
Previous sediment sampling was done in 1972 and 1986 by MDNR, in 1981 by GLNPO
and in 1982 by the U5ACE. The following list provides a quick glance at the results of these
studies (MDNR 5,1987):
1. Of 13 locations sampled, using guidelines for the pollution classification of Great Lakes
harbor sediments (USEPA Region V, 1977 and MDNR, 1986), all the sediment samples
collected were classified as heavily polluted for heavy metals and oil/grease
combinations (1972 and 1986).
2. The analysis of 6 sites in Muskegon Lake found that 2 sites were heavily polluted for
heavy metals and TKN concentrations (1981).
Overall, the most contaminated sediments appear to be at either former industrial point source
discharge sites, storm sewer outfalls or in the deep lake basins. The most recent sediment
sampling was done in 1990 and determined that there was a general decreasing trend in
concentrations in sediments of the deeper basins. No detectable levels of PCBs were found.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimates for the volume of contaminated sediments in the Muskegon Lake AOC are
presently available.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Although there is no specific advisory for Muskegon Lake, there is a statewide advisory
for restricted consumption of piscivorous (fish eating) fish due to elevated levels of Mercury which
includes this AOC. This advisory was initially issued in 1989 by the Michigan Department of
Public Health. A 1986 survey of Muskegon Lake fish indicated that walleye and large mouth
bass in Muskegon Lake contained Mercury concentrations greater than .5 ppm.
Enforcement History Related to Superfund Sites
This AOC has 1 Superfund site that is located within the AOC's watershed. The now
defunct Cordova (Ott/Story) Chemical Company plant was used to manufacture various
synthetic organic intermediates, including pharmaceutical and agricultural products. Solvents,
such as benzene, toluene, methanol, dimethylaniline, tetrahydrofuran and carbon tetrachloride
were used in manufacturing processes (MDNR 4,1987). Currently, this site has contaminated
groundwater which vents to Little Bear Creek, a tributary to Bear Creek, and then flows into Bear
Lake. The contaminated plume is estimated to be approximately 1.5 billion gallons containing
around 5 million pounds of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The Remedial
Investigation/Feasibility Study (RI/FS) was completed in 1990, but no remediation of the
sediments has yet occurred.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
Approximately every 2 years the USAGE dredges the 6,500 foot navigation channel
which connects Muskegon Lake and Lake Michigan. In 1984, the ACE dredged 50,500 cubic
yards from the harbor, in 1988, 53,774 cubic yards and in 1991, 85,100 cubic yards were
removed. There has also been considerable shoreline dredging for marinas along the south
shore of Muskegon Lake.
25
-------
Technical Tools in Use and Needed
Currently the remedial strategy is for natural sedimentation. In 1994-95, the Muskegon
Lake AOC RAP will be updated and at that time an extensive, updated characterization of the
sediments will be needed in order to address the issues of the remaining sediment problem.
State Requests
According to the State, Muskegon Lake is in good shape and is one of the finest fisheries
in the area. The major discharges were removed in the 70's and since then the lake has greatly
improved with the exception of tl ie localized areas of elevated contamination. One of the areas
of elevated contamination is located near the 11th street storm sewer where there appears to
be increasing levels of Mercury. If this area could be monitored, it may help in determining
whether or not the sediments should be removed. It would also be beneficial to have more
studies done to further characterize organic contamination in the groundwater.
River Raisin
Location of Site
The River Raisin flows southeast through the southeast corner of Michigan's Lower
Peninsula, discharging into Lake Erie at Monroe Harbor. The boundaries of the AOC have been
defined as the lower 2.6 miles of the River Raisin, downstream from Dam No. 6 at Winchester
Bridge in the city of Monroe, extending one-half mile into Lake Erie, and including Plum Creek
which discharges to Lake Erie through a canal (Figure 12). Once forested within mature
hardwoods, the area within this AOC is now mostly cleared and the land use is mostly urban,
suburban and industrial. Industries within the AOC indude automotive, steel and paper
manufacturers. Additionally, there are several landfills that border the river.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Data collected from the River Raisin AOC has indicated that the sediments are heavily
polluted with PCBs, Chromium, Copper, Zinc, Volatile Solids, oil and grease. The following points
summarize some of what is known about the contamination of the sediments within this AOC.
1. In 1976, sediment samples collected by MDNR downstream of the Ford Motor Company
fadlity in Monroe, Michigan, showed the highest levels of Chromium, Copper and Zinc
in the AOC, and were above the limit for "heavily polluted" conditions based upon USEPA
guidelines (USEPA Region V, 1977).
2. A July 1989, MDNR survey found PCB concentrations ranging from .6 ppm to 24 ppm
with the highest concentration collected from a location along the northern side of the
river across from Detroit Edison's intake canal.
3. An April 23, 1991, sampling by Michigan State University discovered PCB ranges from
. 1 ppm, at a depth of 15 to 20 cm, to 42,167 ppm at a depth of 5 to 10 cm in the vicinity
of Ford Motor Company's former 48" outfall.
4. On November 25,1991, MDNR's Surface Water Quality Division collected sediment
samples from the River Raisin near the Ford Motor Company's former 48" outfall and
found PCB levels ranging from 55 ppm to 4,600 ppm.
5. An October 15, 1992, an USEPA survey found PCB levels ranging from .04 ppm to 20,000
ppm near Ford's former 48" outfall.
26
-------
Figure 12: River Raisin
Area of Concern
LAPLAISANCE BAY
-------
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
Estimates for the volume of contaminants polluting the River Raisin have only been
completed for the "hot spot" by the Ford Motor plant outfall. It is approximated that 33,000
cubic yards of contaminated sediment will be removed during the PCB "hot spot" clean-up
project.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Since 1987, the River Raisin has had a fish consumption advisory in place for carp and
white bass over 11". This advisory specifically places the area below Dam No. 6 at the
Winchester Bridge in the "no consumption" category due to the levels of PCBs found in the
aforementioned fish. Caged fish studies conducted by MDNR in 1988 confirmed that PCB
uptake rates in the test fish were rapid and that PCB tissue concentrations were significant at
the end of the 28-day test.
Enforcement History Related to Superfund Sites
There are officially no Superfund sites within this AOC. However, sediment data was
collected in 1992 by the Emergency Response Branch of Superfund to determine the extent of
the PCB contamination of the "hot spot" adjacent to the Ford Motor Company facility in Monroe,
Michigan. These investigations pinpointed the contamination adjacent to a Ford outfall, now
closed, but also determined that there were several other sources that contributed to the
contamination of the AOC. In regards to the Ford site, remedial action has been proposed to
include dredging the PCB "hotspot", dewatering the sediments, treating all PCB contaminated
wastewater and transporting and disposing of the dredged spoil at a Federally approved
disposal facility. The Emergency Response Branch will be overseeing work being performed by
the PRP.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
If possible, the USACE dredges the River Raisin navigation channel and turning basin
annually. However, if it cannot be dredged annually, the USACE never waits longer than 2
years. In the past, dredge spoils were disposed of at a power plant landfill and the Port of
Monroe landfill, but are now placed in the Sterling Park Confined Disposal Facility (CDF).
Technical Tools in Use and Needed
The most recent sampling work has been done by the Emergency Response Branch of
Superfund in relation to determining the extent of PCB contamination attributable to the Ford
facility in Monroe. In addition to this work, the USEPA and the US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFW5) will be performing a caged catfish/caged zebra mussel study before, during and
after the dredging. This study will include 3 different sets of animals and will help determine the
uptake of PCBs at all different phases of dredging.
State Requests
The River Raisin RAP committee will need help completing the characterization of the
sediments if it cannot compel PRPs to conduct this work. This work would focus on detailing the
horizontal and vertical contamination of "hot spots" in addition to concentrating on the heavy
metal problems. This would be necessary since most of the recent work has been with PCBs.
Along with direct sediment work, it would greatly help the resolution of the River Raisin AOC if
there were more funds for Best Management Practices (BMPs) and erosion control. Each year
the river needs to be dredged due to heavy sedimentation from agricultural practices within
several counties. A portion of this soil runoff settles in the river, mixes with the contamination and
27
-------
increases the burden of cleaning up the sediments.
Rouge River
Location of Site
Located in southeastern Michigan, the Rouge River flows through Detroit's northern and
western suburbs, emptying into the Detroit River at Zug Island in Detroit. The Rouge River
consists of four main branches that total 125 miles. These branches are fed by many tributary
streams and more than 400 lakes and ponds. The entire river basin is included in the Rouge
River AOC.
The Rouge River watershed is the longest and most densely populated and
industrialized area in southeastern Michigan. Over 1.5 million people inhabit the basin's three
counties and more than 50% of the land use in the basin is residential, commercial or industrial.
Because this AOC is so large, for planning and remedial action purposes, the basin was divided
into 11 subbasins (Figure 13).
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
The sediments of the Rouge River are contaminated with Cadmium, Lead, Mercury,
Cyanide, PCBs, PAHs, oil and grease. One of the reasons for the serious contamination of the
sediments within this AOC is the excessive amount of CSO discharge. There are 168 CSOs that
annually discharge an estimated 7.8 billion gallons of combined sanitary sewage and
stormwater (MDNR and SEMCOG, 1990).
Sediments in the Rouge River have been found to be of major or minor concern in 10 of
the 11 subbasins. Identified as having a minor concern with contaminated sediments are Main
Subbasin 1 and 2, Upper Subbasin 1, Middle Subbasins 1, 2 and 3 and Lower Subbasin 1.
Identified as having a major concern are Main Subbasins 3 and 4 and Lower Subbasin 2. The
major designation signified that 50% or more of the MDNR 1986-87 sites in the subbasin were
heavily polluted for at least one parameter according to U5EPA guidelines (U5EPA Region V,
1977), and that the biota in the subbasin indicated use impairment. The minor designation
signified less than 50% (MDNR and SEMCOG, 1990). Overall, the levels of contamination in the
sediment increase from the headwater to downstream reaches.
A sediment survey of the Rouge River was completed by MDNR in 1989 and concluded
the following (MDNR 6, 1992):
1. PCBs in the sediments were detected primarily in the Newburgh-Nankin Lake stretch of
the Middle Branch of the Rouge River. PCB levels in 19 Newburgh Lake fish averaged
8.9 ppm.
2. Sediment Mercury levels were high at two stations, both on the Middle Branch; all others
were close to average levels.
3. Heavy metal sediment concentrations were lowest at the Rouge River headwaters and
highest in Newburgh Lake.
4. In comparison to the 1986-87 sediment survey, areas with lower levels of metals in
1986-87 tended to decrease in concentration, while areas of greater concentration in
1986-87 tended to increase.
5. The temporal trend for metals and PCBs in the lake core samples was an increase from
the bottom toward the middle and then a decrease toward the top. This indicated a
28
-------
Figure 13: Subbasins of the River Rouge Area of Concern
AUBURN HILLS
PONTIAC
ROCHESTER
ORCHARD LAKE
VILLAGE
OEARBO
GARDEN L_H
HIGHLANC
•ARK
ECORSE
samcog 1988
-------
decrease in recent sources of sediment contamination.
Currently, most of the sediment work within this Rouge River AOC is being done through
the Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Program conducted by the Wayne County
Department of Public Service.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimates are presently available concerning the volume of contaminated sediments
within the Rouge River AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
An extensive biological and fisheries survey of the Rouge River, completed in 1987, found
that the river ranged from fair to poor quality. A result of this work was fish consumption
advisories were placed on the Lower Branch, Middle Branch and the lower portion of the Main
Branch of the river. The fishing advisories are specific for certain branches. From the Middle
Branch downstream from Phoenix Lake and the Main Branch downstream to Ford Road there
is restricted consumption for all species except bluegill and sunfish, while in the Lower Branch
there are no restrictions except for carp and sucker.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
The only federal Superfund site within this AOC is 3M. They have dealt with some
remediation of the sediments, but that work is currently on hold while they concentrate on other
remedial actions.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
In the Main-4 Subbasin, dredging of the lower 3 mile segment of the Rouge River
navigational channel is done annually by the USACE. This portion includes the turning basin at
Ford Motor Company boat slip downstream to the mouth of Short-Cut Canal. All dredge spoils
are placed in a CDF. The old river channel around Zug Island is dredged approximately every
5 years. Other than the Main-4 Subbasin, no other dredging has occurred. Any private
dredging has been discouraged because the pollutant level of the sediments is largely
unknown.
Technical Tools in Use and Needed
The Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration Program is currently the largest
remediation effort in progress within this AOC. The primary goals of this program are to
quantify the pollutant sources contributing to the Rouge River, prioritize the cleanup effort
identified in the RAP and demonstration program and initiate a watershed wide remediation
effort. The focus of this program is combined sewer overflows, and will be to develop and
implement a watershed wide approach for improving water quality problems caused by wet
weather events from CSOs.
Within this program a sediment remediation pilot study is proposed for Newburgh Lake.
The purpose of this is to determine the process for obtaining required permits and approvals for
a sediment remediation project. The Newburgh Lake sediments display a wide range of
contaminant concentrations most likely generated by a variety of sources. This is also a widely
used recreational facility and its selection as a pilot study area is highly visible and important
from a public participation point of view. This project will address those sediments for which
there is no clearly identified PRP. As of yet there has been no dredging and the project remains
29
-------
in the developmental stage.
State Requests
Within the Rouge River AOC the State would like to complete some sediment
reevaluation. This is important because it is now known that the branches are contaminated,
there are many PCB "hot spots" upstream and downstream of Newburgh Lake and one
additional impoundment is contaminated. Specific requests focus on the need to have more
work done on the Lower, Upper and Main branches of the Rouge in order to discern what is
actually occurring within the sediments in these areas.
Saginaw River/Bay
Location of Site
Saginaw Bay, 1,143 square miles in size, cuts into Michigan's Lower Peninsula on the
western shore of Lake Huron. The bay is 52 miles in length and varies in width from 13 to 26
miles. Approximately 75% of the river input comes from the Saginaw River with the remaining
direct flow coming from 28 rivers, creeks or agricultural drains. The Area of Concern includes
the entire Saginaw River and Saginaw Bay (Figure 14). Over one-half of the land use in the
Saginaw River/Bay region is agricultural, with the primary urban and industrial centers being
Flint, Saginaw, Bay City and Midland.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Within the Saginaw River and Bay there is a major problem with PCBs and heavy metal
contamination. Chromium and Lead are the two most abundant metals in Saginaw Bay
followed by Copper, Nickel and Zinc (MDNR 7,1988). The USAGE has recently reported that the
river is also contaminated by dioxin and furan.
The Saginaw River/Bay AOC is characterized by sediment "hot spots" located below the
WWTPs, the General Motors sites and the C50 discharge points; however, there is also other
uniform contamination throughout the river and bay. Specifically, high levels of PCBs are present
near the outfalls of the two GM industrial facilities that discharged contaminated wastes to the
river: the GM Central Foundry in Saginaw and the GM-CPC Plant in Bay City. In addition to
discharging directly into the river, these establishments also sent contaminated wastewater to
their WWTPs (MDNR 7,1988). Sediment contamination in the river is most significant
immediately downstream of Saginaw and Bay City, while the most contaminated bay
sediments are north of the Saginaw River mouth.
It is worthwhile to mention that the flood of 1986 may have redistributed some of the
sediment in the river. However, an MDNR 1988 sediment survey indicated that most of the
contaminated sediments appeared to be relatively undisturbed. Keeping this in mind, the
following results of sediment sampling by the EPA and ACE (1983) should be viewed as
estimates of the levels of contamination (MDNR 7,1988):
1. Using 1977 EPA criteria, sediments in the inner bay that had respective average Arsenic
and Barium concentrations of 16 ppm and 422 ppm were categorized as "heavily
polluted." Sediments with average concentrations of Chromium of 63 ppm, Copper of
25 ppm, Lead of 45 ppm, Nickel of 32 ppm and Zinc of 96 ppm were classified as
"moderately polluted" (USEPA Region V, 1977).
2. ACE 1983 data demonstrated that the highest levels in the river were found below the
30
-------
-O
^
x/v •. ,J::;ai»:::::;::::::::::c::: ::::::::::::::V:::::::::""K:«
,^T N^R?;xiF:!:":^li""M'Hii::::"::;:!:j?*tt":"::::C"::
^ te^HH-Hils^nfe^-iH;^?*^---'^-;;
,&\ s* ppHHHn-^^un^iiiH-yi^-^-H-^l .^
iigr ^ y* \ »:KH:H::H:::;^'^:::::IU^:iiiJi» *
< '.4> 'x .J^S>^::»:«:«ft^^:ryvP?^-J*^-yj?r-:rx '
' < \ ,i/ x *^ /^
.^x. X ^ ^Sf \ /
>4/ ^ \ .-if. >r /
X/\ ,-^\X
-------
GMsite. The values of contaminants found were: PCS, 27 ppm; Chromium, 180 ppm;
Copper, 150 ppm; Iron, 34,000 ppm; Lead, 96 ppm; Nickel, 87 ppm; and Zinc, 560
ppm. All of these levels fell within the "heavily polluted" EPA classification (U5EPA Region
V, 1977).
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimate of the total amount of contaminated sediment in the Saginaw River/Bay
system has been calculated. However, it was approximated that 3.7 metric tons of PCB remain
in the active sediment in inner Saginaw Bay, but this value is fairly dated (Brandon, D.L. et al.,
1991).
Fish Consumption Advisories
The fish consumption advisories currently in effect for several species in the Saginaw
River/Bay AOC are restricted to bottom feeding fish and fish with relatively high levels of body
fat. People are advised not to eat any carp or catfish from either the Saginaw River or Saginaw
Bay because PCB concentrations in some fish tissue samples exceed the Michigan Department
of Public Health criteria for levels of public health concern. Additionally, for Saginaw Bay, it is
suggested that people restrict their consumption of lake trout, rainbow trout and brown trout to
no more than one meal per week. There are no advisories for walleye or yellow perch,
principal sport fish, in Saginaw Bay (MDNR 7,1988), but it is suggested that people not
consume large quantities of any fish from the Saginaw River.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
There are 13 Superfund sites within the Saginaw Bay watershed. Of these 13 sites, only
2, Velsicol and the Shiawassee River, have contributed to the contamination of the Saginaw
system sediments. These two sites are responsible for some of the PCB contamination, but
currently there is no activity relating to the remediation of the sediments at either of these sites.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
Since 1982 the Saginaw River has been dredged annually, except for 1983 when the
Bay was dredged. Overall, in this 10 year period, 2,575,588 cubic yards of sediment have been
dredged from the river by the U5ACE. I n 1983, the Bay was dredged and 745,277 cubic yards
were removed. All of the sediment removed from the Saginaw River and Bay was
contaminated and the dredge spoil was disposed of in a CDF.
Technical Tools in Use and Needed
Saginaw River/Bay is one of the 5 ARCS priority sites. Presently, a baseline human health
risk assessment has been completed and a sediment dynamics model is being developed
from biological, chemical, toxicological and benthic community structure data that was collected
in 1990. The results of the ARCS human health risk assessment were as follows (Crane, J.L. (2),
1992):
1. Non-carcinogenic risks, as represented by Hazard Index (HI), were less than .5 for all
exposure levels and pathways except for the subsistence consumption of walleye and
carp.
2. The estimated upper-bound carcinogenic risk levels for all pathways and exposure
scenarios were at or above concern levels.
As for the sediment dynamics model, the model will be run for 5 different scenarios in
order to obtain an understanding of the different remedial options on the health of the Saginaw
31
-------
River. The scenarios that will be tested are:
1. No action alternative
2. Dredge lower 5 miles
3. Determine adequacy of natural cap below WWTP
4. Dredge pocket below WWTP
5. Predict thickness of cap needed to ensure stability
Results are currently unavailable but should be ready sometime in the fall of 1993.
Right now the ARCS work is the major activity occurring in relation to the sediments within
the Saginaw River/Bay AOC. No other sediment sampling is in progress and potential MDNR
sediment activities are being delayed until the ARCS results can be studied. As for other
technical tools related to the sediments, more caged fish studies will soon be conducted in order
to obtain more information concerning the PCB uptake rate.
State Requests
Most requests would be reserved until after the ARCS data becomes available and
some remedial decisions can be considered. The State was disappointed that the ARCS study
was only focused on the mouth of the Saginaw River and that it did not include any stations in
the Bay. Future needs and requests would highlight the contaminated sites in the upper river in
the city of Saginaw and representative areas of the Bay if ARCS results show significant inputs
from Saginaw River sediments. The decision to focus on these areas of the AOC would come by
way of a determination of concern for the lower river and the existence of similarly
contaminated areas in the upper river along with the extensive area of lower-level
(concentration) contamination in Saginaw Bay.
Additionally, there is the need for funding to look at the effects of organics and heavy
metals on the Saginaw River/Bay ecosystem including population effects and community
function, contaminant cycling, and impacts of toxics due to sediment resuspension in the bay. It
was further suggested that the development of new EPA sediment criteria for relevant
parameters would be extremely helpful in the remedial decision-making process.
Torch Lake
Location of Site
Torch Lake, a tributary to the Keweenaw Waterway and Lake Superior, is located in
Michigan's Upper Peninsula. The AOC includes Torch Lake and its shoreline (Figure 15). Torch
Lake is 2,718 acres in size and is approximately 14 miles by water from Lake Superior. The
land around the AOC is primarily forested. Copper mining and processing were prevalent in
the area until 1968.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
For more than 100 years, tailings from copper mining and by-products from various
mining processes were dumped into Torch Lake, thereby contaminating the lake's sediments
with heavy metals and other contaminants. The sediments are now heavily polluted with
Arsenic, Chromium, Copper, Lead, Nickel and Zinc. Additionally, PAHs have been detected in
some samples.
Over 200 million tons of milling wastes were dumped into the lake, and, as a result,
32
-------
Figure 15: Torch Lak«; Area of Concern and Superfund location,
Operable Unit I
Operable Unit II
Operable Unit 01
-------
much of the bottom and most of the western shore of Torch Lake now consists of "stampsands"
(a local term for the copper tailings). The presence of these "stampsands" make it impossible
for the lake to support a normal benthic community. Also, besides the "stampsand" piles, there
is a 3 acre patch of sediment containing substantially higher levels of contamination than the
rest of the lake. This is thought to be caused by the ongoing industrial activity on the lake shore
which commenced after the copper milling activity ceased (MDNR 9, 1987).
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
Approximately 200 million tons of copper mine tailings were dumped into Torch Lake
between 1868-1968. This filled around 20% of the original volume of the lake. No estimates are
available as to the total amount of contaminated sediments within this AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Torch Lake was included in a state fish consumption advisory in effect from 1983 to 1993
for sauger and walleye. This advisory was issued based upon the high frequency of liver
tumors discovered in the late 70's, possibly attributable to the past use of organic chemicals. In
March 1993, these fishing advisories were lifted. The decision to remove the advisories was
based on 1988 MDNR fish tumor studies which showed tumor incidences not significantly
different from other lakes. Currently, there are no AOC specific fish advisories.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
Torch Lake was designated as a National Priority List (NPL) site in 1986, at which time a
search for PRPs began. In 1988 the RI/F5 phase was initiated and the site was divided into 3
Operable Units (Oils): OU 1 consisted of the surface tailings on the western shore of Torch Lake,
OU 2 included Torch Lake and OU 3 was the Keweenaw Waterway. Units 1 and 3 consist of
various "stampsand" piles located throughout the Keweenaw Peninsula and in the general
vicinity of Torch Lake, while unit 2 consists of groundwater, surface water and sediments of the
Torch Lake system. Only unit 2 is actually in the lake.
The Rl results for unit 2 found that while Torch Lake bottom sediments were inhospitable
to a normally expected benthic community, no subsequent damage to the food chain could
clearly be discerned. It was also determined that the human health risk was deemed to be
within the acceptable range, although drinking water wells, if installed in the "stampsand" piles
in the future, would potentially subject residents to unacceptable risks (USEPA Region V, 1992).
The subsequent decision for unit 2 involved accepting the no action alternative, while the decision
for the remediation of units 1 and 3 focused on revegetation and natural sedimentation.
Superfund is presently working to formalize the whole process with MDNR and will institute
some long-term monitoring of the sediments (USEPA Region V, 1992).
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
No dredging has ever occurred within the Torch Lake AOC.
Technical Tools in Use and Needed
Initially, MDNR's plan was to allow natural sedimentation processes to cover the
contaminated sediments, because the vast expanse and volume of the sediment contamination
made remedies such as dredging infeasible. MDNR also encouraged shoreline stabilization
and revegetation in order to reduce wind erosion and airborne transport of copper tailings that
were deposited in the area . For example, sewage sludge from the Portage Lake sewer
authority is being used to encourage vegetation on the shoreline. Currently, Superfund has
33
-------
chosen a no action alternative for the 3 acre contamination site, and has chosen to revegetate
and let natural sedimentation take care of the toxic sediments problem. Additionally, they will
initiate a long-term monitoring of the sediments.
State Requests
As far as the remediation of the contaminated sediments is concerned, it would be very
helpful to have an assessment of natural sedimentation rate and effect in order to answer the
question, "is this an effective form of remediation?" This assessment would encompass
chemical, physical and biological parameters.
White Lake
Location of Site
White Lake, a 2,570 acre drowned river mouth, is located on the east shore of Lake
Michigan, close to the communities of Montague and Whitehall. The AOC includes White Lake
and a .25 mile wide zone around the lake (Figure 16). Although developed, most of the land
around the AOC is wooded or grassy. Sand dunes separate the AOC from Lake Michigan. The
land is used primarily for recreation and agriculture, but the AOC also contains substantial
residential and industrial areas.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Historical municipal and industrial discharges to White Lake resulted in elevated
sediment concentrations of Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead, Manganese, Mercury, Nickel,
Zinc, PCBs, oil and grease (USEPA Region V, 1977).
The most elevated heavy metal is Chromium. Elevated levels of Chromium in the White
Lake sediments resulted from past discharges by the Whitehall Leather Company. A maximum
Chromium concentration of 4,300 ppm was collected in the vicinity of the now defunct outfall of
Whitehall Leather Company. Prior to 1976, when the company discharged in White Lake, lake
sediment Chromium concentrations in the vicinity of the discharge reportedly contained more
than 23,000 ppm in 1980 (SAIC 2, 1987). Today, the Chromium contamination is evident
lakewide, and remain elevated near the facility.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimates of the volume of contaminated sediments within the White Lake AOC are
available.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Within the White Lake AOC, a fish consumption advisory is presently in effect for carp.
This advisory was originally issued because elevated levels of PCBs were found in fish tissue.
Enforcement History Related to Superfund Sites
There is only one Superfund site within this AOC that is believed to be responsible for past
contamination of the sediments. Hooker Chemical and Plastics Company (HCPC) was placed
on the NPL in 1982. Prior to this time, in 1979, a Consent Judgment was issued to have HCPC
deal with the contamination of groundwater and soils that resulted from their improper waste
disposal methods. Pursuant to the Consent Judgment, HCPC implemented a groundwater
purge and treatment system and had to remove and dispose/confine solid wastes in day
34
-------
Figure 16
AREA OF CONCERN: WHfTE LAKE
-------
vaults on the company property. Data collected from March 1987 to January 1990 for the
purge well system indicated that 100% of the plume is being captured. To date, Hooker has
not been held responsible for the remediation of any contaminated sediments within the White
Lake AOC.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
The only dredging that has occurred in the White Lake AOC has been in conjunction with
the recent large demand for marinas. Maintenance dredging of the navigational channel to
Lake Michigan has historically been conducted by the USAGE.
Technical Tools in Use and Needed
Effective programs for dealing with the industrial contamination are in progress and time
is needed to pass so the effects of this remedial action can be studied. The benthic community
is presently being assessed to determine contaminant trends and general health of the benthic
communities.
State Requests
For the White Lake AOC, it was mentioned that the State would like to look at toxicity
testing to see if biological impairment is occurring and to help determine if the toxic sediments
should be removed from localized areas. It would also be desirable to implement some
additional trend monitoring so that the sediment characteristics and conditions could be more
closely evaluated over time. Additionally, the State would like to better characterize the "hot
spots" to consider the possibility of removal. This would be especially important around Tannery
Bay where the deposits of cow hides and Chromium concentrations are elevated.
35
-------
Minnesota
St. Louis River/Bay
Location of Site
The St. Louis River flows southwest 171 miles, from its headwaters in Minnesota, into Lake
Superior. The river's lower 23 miles form part of the boundary between Minnesota and
Wisconsin. The lower reach is a freshwater estuary, from just below the Fond du Lac Dam to the
outlet of Lake Superior. The St. Louis River System includes several major bays and tributaries.
For purposes of the RAP, the St. Louis River AOC primarily focuses on the St. Louis River below
Cloquet, including St. Louis Bay, Superior Bay, Aliouez Bay and the lower Nemadji River (Figure
17). The 39 river miles of the St. Louis River, between the city of Cloquet and its entrance to Lake
Superior, has historically been the region of most intense water uses, development and
industrial activities.
The St. Louis River AOC is shared by Minnesota and Wisconsin and both are actively
cooperating and are involved in the development of the RAP. However, in an attempt to simplify
information collection for this report, only the lead state, Minnesota, was asked to supply data
and opinions.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Sediments within the St. Louis River AOC are contaminated with Arsenic, Cadmium,
Chromium, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Cyanide, dioxin, PCBs and PAHs. Certain areas have
particularly elevated levels of sediment contaminants. At each of the following locations,
elevated levels of a variety of PAHs and/or heavy metals have been detected in bottom
sediments (MPCA and WDNR, 1992):
The embayment that received discharge from the Western Lake Superior
Sanitary District and historically received discharge from previous
treatment plants in Duluth, Minnesota.
The Interlake Superfund site vicinity in Duluth, Minnesota.
The US Steel Superfund site vicinity in Duluth, Minnesota.
Newton Creek and Hog Island Inlet of Superior Bay, Wisconsin.
Crawford Creek Wetland/Koppers Co. vicinity in Superior Bay, Wisconsin.
PAH concentrations as high as 2,690 ppm have been found in the St. Louis River AOC
near the former Duluth Tar and Chemical Company site. Heavy metal concentrations of 68
ppm for Chromium, 45,000 ppm for Iron, and 38 ppm for Lead and Nickel and 290 ppm for
Zinc were discovered during a January, 1989 USAGE sampling. Overall, further chemical and
biological characterization of the sediment within the St. Louis River AOC is needed.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
There are no estimates currently available as to the total volume of contaminated
sediments within the St. Louis River AOC. However, it has been approximated that around
270,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment exist in the St. Louis River near the mouth of the
Wire Mill Settling Basin. Of this volume, 10,000 cubic yards of sediment are thought to be
contaminated by PAHs (MPCA and WDNR, 1992).
Fish Consumption Advisories
In the St. Louis River AOC, contamination of fish tissue by toxic substances has resulted in
36
-------
Figure 17
St. Louis River Area of Concern
Lake Superior
St.Louis River
Cloquet
Nemadji River
-------
the issuance of fish consumption advisories for some size classes of particular fish species by
both Minnesota and Wisconsin. The advisories have been issued due to the presence of dioxin,
Mercury and RGBs in fish tissue.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
In 1983, the St. Louis River/lnterlake/Duluth Tar Site was added to the NPL. This
Superfund site is the former location of steel and iron plants, and separate tar and chemical
companies which utilized by-products of the steel plant coking operations. US Steel-Duluth
Works, Interlake Iron Corporation, Allied Signal Inc. and Domtar Inc. are all PRPs, responsible for
the clean-up of this Superfund site. Although listed on the NPL as one site, several different
investigations have been initiated in order to address the problems more efficiently.
For the Interlake/Allied Signal/Domtar site, the Remedial Investigation identified
contaminated sediments at 3 principal areas, Stryker Embayment, the Hallett Boat Slip and the
terminus of the 54th Avenue Peninsula. Each area has exhibited high concentrations of PAHs
and other contaminants of concern. In 1992, the excavation of some soils and sediments from
the terminus of the 54th Avenue Peninsula was performed. No other sediment remedial activity
has occurred in conjunction with this operable unit.
The US Steel-Duluth Works site also has 3 principal areas of sediment contamination.
These areas include a region defined as the estuary off the delta of the Un-named Creek, the
sediments off-shore of the Wire Mill Settling Basin and the sediments within the Wire Mill Settling
Basin itself. As of yet, no remediation has been attempted or ordered on these sediment areas.
Removal costs for sediments off-shore of the Wire Mill Settling Basin, alone, are estimated to
range from $13 to $52 million (MPCA and WDNR, 1992).
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
The management of dredged materials taken from the lower St. Louis River is of
importance to the economic vitality of the Duluth-Superior Harbor. Dredging operations of the
U5ACE annually remove approximately 150,000 cubic yards of sediment. Most materials are
disposed of in the Erie Pier containment facility which is the Duluth-Superior's sole disposal site.
This CDF is quickly approaching maximum capacity and new solutions to the long-term disposal
and management of dredged materials are now being discussed.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
All considered, more extensive chemical and biological characterization of the sites,
where some sediment data are available, is needed. Characterization of sediment quality is
also needed for large areas within the estuary, particularly in shallow biologically productive
areas and in reservoirs behind the dams, where little or no data is available. Even the 5 areas,
which have clearly elevated levels of contaminants, are in need of further characterization
before remedial work can begin.
In order to address this lack of sediment data, a survey of sediment quality in the Duluth-
Superior Harbor is scheduled to begin in September of 1993. This study is to be funded by
U5EPA GLNPO and is intended to better help characterize the sediment quality in 30 locations,
including biologically productive backwaters. Additionally, USEPA Region V has funded a
sediment study of the Thomson, Forbay and Fond du Lac areas that is intended to analyze for
sources and levels of dioxin, Mercury and PCBs. It is hoped that PRPs can eventually be
identified to provide money to cover remedial costs.
37
-------
State Requests
It was mentioned by the State that it would be helpful for the eventual remediation of the
St. Louis River AOC if technical assistance from the ARCS Program is readily available when this
site reaches the remedial decision-making stage. It would also be helpful, in relation to the
sediment situation, if more funding were available to assist in deciding which sampling sites to
address more intensively. As far as remediation of the AOC as a whole, habitat protection
programs and NFS pollution control programs would also be very helpful in restoring the St.
Louis River Ecosystem.
38
-------
New York
Buffalo River
Location of Site
The Buffalo River, in the southern part of the city of Buffalo, New York, empties into
eastern Lake Erie. The river is approximately six miles in length with three major tributaries
feeding into it: the Cayuga, Cazenovia and Buffalo Creeks. Additionally, the river flows from the
east and enters Lake Erie near the head of the Niagara River. The AOC includes *he entire
Buffalo River (Figure 18). Land uses within this AOC are highly industrial and residential, while
the land uses within the tributary watershed are agricultural and forested..
Historically, the Buffalo River served the industries along its banks as a convenient
transportation corridor, a source of process and cooling water and a receptacle for
wastewater. The AOC has been heavily industrialized, but steel production and oil refining were
terminated in the early 1980's, thus alleviating some of the previous pollutional pressures placed
on the Buffalo River.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Sediments within the Buffalo River AOC are heavily polluted with metals, Cyanide, PCBs,
PAHs, pesticides, oil and grease (NYSDEC 1,1989). Sediment sampling studies were done by
GLNPO and the Buffalo District USACE in 1981, by NYSDEC in 1983 and by Erie County in 1985.
The following points summarize the some of the findings of these 3 studies (NYSDEC 1,1989):
1. PCBs were observed in 85 out of 86 bottom sediment samples analyzed in the 3
separate studies from 1981 to 1985.
2. In the 1981 EPA sampling, 16 out of 16 samples showed chlordane, while 15 out of 16
showed DDT. Other samples analyzed by the USACE and Erie County also showed DDT.
3. Metals and Cyanide were present in the sediment at levels that exceeded EPA criteria
(USEPA Region V, 1977).
4. PAHs were also found in most contaminated samples. Extracts of Buffalo River
sediments containing PAHs have been shown to induce tumors in laboratory fish.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
To date there have not been any volume estimates of the amount of contaminated
sediment within the Buffalo River AOC. This is mostly due to the fact that the previously available
equipment was only able to sample up to 4 feet in depth. Since the ARCS program has been
working on this AOC, they can now sample 10 to 15 feet deep. No volume estimates were
previously attempted because it was not possible to sample deep enough. From the ARCS
results, the depth to which samples need to be taken in order to obtain an accurate volume
estimate will be determined. After this information is available, a volume estimate of
contaminated sediments can be completed.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Unacceptably high levels of PCBs and chlordane in carp have led to a state fish
consumption advisory which affects the Buffalo River AOC. This "no consumption" advisory was
issued by the New York State Department of Health in 1987 and was based upon fish
sampling data collected by DEC.
39
-------
Figure 18: Buffalo River Area of Concern
AREA OF CONCERN
-------
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
Currently, there are no Federal Superfund sites within the Buffalo River AOC that are
responsible for the remediation of any contaminated sediments. Buffalo Color Corporation,
while not on the Federal NPL, is planning the removal of some sediments. This will be
performed within the Construction Phase of their remedial activity. As of yet however, no
remedial work involving the sediments has been initiated.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
The USACE dredges the Buffalo River to maintain it at a depth of 22 feet below low lake
level for navigational purposes. The Buffalo River sediments are contaminated to a level that
prohibits open lake dumping and therefore, dredged sediments musf be placed in specifically
confined sites. The most recent navigational dredging was completed in 1992. In addition, last
year the ACE performed a dredging demonstration project in conjunction with the ARCS
program. This work involved testing of the environmental effects of dredging and was
completed through a Congressional appropriation. Several different dredging types were
tested and the work was completed before the navigational dredging, in order to ensure that
conditions were as settled as possible. Results should soon be available.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
At the start of the RAP process it was determined that a sediment dynamics model for
the Buffalo River AOC was needed (NY5DEC 2, 1990). This model would allow sediment
scouring and deposition to be accurately predicted under a wide variety of flow conditions and
alternative dredging scenarios. Currently, this model is being developed under the ARCS
program and should be completed before 1994. The model could be run for 7 different
scenarios in order to obtain an understanding of the various dredging impacts on the health of
the Buffalo River. Some scenarios that could be analyzed for the Buffalo River are: the no action
alternative, complete dredging of the lower 5 miles of the river, dredging of the entire river to 10
feet, discontinuation of dredging above Hamburg Cove, the Deadman's Creek demonstration
project, site-specific "hot spot" dredging on Buffalo Color peninsula and site-specific dredging at
Blue Tower turning basin. To date, it has not been decided whether or not every possible
scenario will be run.
Also under ARCS, a pilot scale demonstration of remediation technologies thermal
desorption unit on contaminated sediments from the Buffalo River was performed. In this study,
a thermal desorption unit was evaluated for its effectiveness in remediating Buffalo River
sediments contaminated with PAHs. The early results indicated that, with sediments remaining
in the thermal desorption unit from 30 to 90 minutes and sediment temperatures reaching 300
to 480 degrees Fahrenheit, 43.2 to 97.9% of total PAHs were removed while 9.1 to 100% of total
PCBs were removed. Although this thermal process had little effect on most metals, 16.7 to
100% of Mercury was removed from sediments during processing (ARCS, 1993).
In addition to the ARCS activities, the NYSDEC has had an automated sampling station
set up to sample storm events and look at the effects of storms on scouring and releasing new
contaminants. This was performed over a period of a few years and the results will be
released soon.
Considering all the studies, the next step will be to decide if the sediments are
contaminated to the point that they need to be removed or if they can be left in place and be
made unavailable so as not to affect human health and aquatic life. The storm event results
40
-------
should help in determining whether or not the severity of scouring would make in place
remediation infeasible.
State Requests
Along with the studies performed under the ARCS program, the Buffalo River has
benefited from Congressional appropriations and therefore, has been very fortunate with the
sources of funding. At this time, the State had no spedfic requests for remedial assistance. It
was mentioned that time Is needed obtain the results from completed studies and take a look
at all the data before any remedial decisions can be made.
Eighteenmile Creek
Location of Site
Eighteenmile Creek is located in northwestern New York, just north of the city of Lockport.
The creek flows north from Lockport into Lake Ontario near the hamlet of Olcott and empties into
Lake Ontario 22 miles east of the Niagara River. The AOC includes Eighteenmile Creek, Olcott
Harbor and the nearshore waters of Lake Ontario near Olcott. The Eighteenmile Creek AOC
begins in a harbor area, flows upstream to a dam which is considered the physical breakpoint
for the boundaries of the AOC. Most of the land use within the AOC is agricultural, however,
there is currently a lot of development pressure around the harbor area.
The three AOCs located in the western part of NY were addressed in a sequential
manner so that available personnel and finances were maximally utilized. Mainly due to citizen
interest, the Buffalo River was designated to be addressed first, followed by the Niagara River
and then Eighteenmile Creek. Currently, the RAP process for Eighteenmile Creek has not yet
begun and most recently, a citizens advisory committee is being formed. It has been estimated
that it will take approximately 18 months to 2 years to complete the Stage I RAP and activities
should commence by the end of 1993.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Sediment characterization information for Eighteenmile Creek is currently extremely
limited. What is known, however, is that the primary problem of contamination of the sediments
within the Eighteenmile Creek AOC is due to heavy metals and a few PCS "hot spots". In a 1981
USAGE study, heavy metal levels in the Olcott Harbor sediments were classified as heavily
polluted with Arsenic, Chromium, Copper, Iron, Lead, Manganese, Nickel and Zinc (USEPA
Region V, 1977). The ACE also noted that the sediment samples collected near the mouth of
Eighteenmile Creek were generally more contaminated than those collected near Lake Ontario.
Additionally, sediments from above Burt Dam contained 12 ppm PCBs when sampled in 1979
(SAIC3, 1987).
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimates of the volume of contaminated sediments within the Eighteenmile Creek
AOC are currently available.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Presently; there is a Lake Ontario fish consumption advisory in effect for numerous
species including coho and chinook salmon, rainbow, lake and brown trout, american eel and
channel catfish. No Eighteenmile Creek AOC specific advisories are in effect at this time, but the
41
-------
fishing advisory for Lake Ontario does extend into the lower portion of the creek. Eighteenmile
Creek is one of the most popular fishing streams on Lake Ontario and most of the fishing is
concentrated in the upper one-fourth of the stream and in Olcott Harbor.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
There are no Federal Superfund sites within the Eighteenmile Creek AOC.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
It is not believed that any dredging has occurred in the Eighteenmile Creek AOC since the
maintenance dredging of Olcott Harbor by the USAGE in 1987. Since that time, only miner
dredging for recreational purposes has been done.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
Information concerning the contamination of the sediments within this AOC is very limited
and dated. Basically, this AOC is starting with no recent sampling data. Currently, there is a
need to assess pollutant loadings and transport mechanisms so that the availability of
pollutants and future contamination can be determined. There is also a need to determine the
volume of sediments that are toxic and to perform risk assessments. These issues are to be
addressed as part of the RAP process. Generally, work within the Eighteen AOC needs to follow
the lead of some other AOCs and begin characterizing sediments more accurately, locating "hot
spots" and discussing modes of remediation.
State Requests
Help with funding the initial sediment work is needed. The State would like this
sediment sampling to be done in the form of cores, instead of surficial grabs, in order to begin
to understand the characteristics and history of the sediments. Also needed is some time for the
State and the RAP Committee to get the process moving. At that time, more specific requests
and information will be available.
Niagara River
Location of Site
The Niagara River flows between the US and Canada from Lake Erie to Lake Ontario.
The international border between Canada and the US divides the Niagara River and serves as
a jurisdictional boundary. The Niagara River AOC includes all 37 miles of the river and is the
dominant inflow into Lake Ontario (Figure 20). The AOC is located in Erie and Niagara counties
in western New York State and extends from Smokes Creek near the southern end of the
Buffalo Harbor to the mouth of the Niagara River at Lake Ontario. Tributaries of the Niagara
River include Smokes Creek, Buffalo River, Scajaquada Creek, Two Mile Creek, Tonawanda
Creek, Cayuga Creek and Gill Creek, in addition to several smaller waterways. The land within
the AOC is used for residential and industrial purposes, yet also supports a major transportation
corridor.
A unique feature of this AOC is that, because of the rapid flow of the water preventing
the settling of any sediment, the Niagara River is scoured to bedrock and till. It is therefore
impossible to obtain any sediment samples since there are no in-place sediments. The river
simply acts as a pipeline carrying the sediment and water right into Lake Ontario. Because of
42
-------
Figure 20: The Niagara River Area of Concern
LAKE ONTARIO
">nraot/\AKE. ONTARIO
-------
this, there is no sediment bed in the whole Niagara River. Generally speaking, depositional
areas do not exist in the river. However, there are several areas, three nearshore embayments
and an upstream portion that is protected inside a breakwall, within the AOC that do have
sediment related issues that are currently being addressed. Along with these specific areas,
some tributaries to the Niagara River AOC also have sediment contamination problems.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments-
The contaminants that have been identified as polluting the sediments within the
Niagara River AOC include heavy metals, PCBs, PAHs, Cyanide, mirex, chlordane, dioxin,
dibenzofuran and hexachlorocyclohexane (BHC). In addition, the presence of
hexachlorobenzene, DDT, DDE and dieldrin in the sediments are suspected causes of aquatic
degradation (NYSDEC3, 1993).
The areas within the Niagara River AOC that have sediment related issues include three
nearshore embayments, Petit Flume, 102nd Street Embayment and Lower Gill Creek, and an
upstream portion of the river, the harbor area by Buffalo River, that is protected inside a
breakwall. The three nearshore embayments are each located adjacent to an inactive
hazardous waste site, and as a result, have generated contaminated sediments. The first area
is at the outlet of the Petit Flume in North Tonawanda, while the second and third, 102nd Street
Embayment and Gill Creek, are both located in the Wheatfield Upper River segment. All three
areas contain sediments contaminated with PCBs, PAHs, BHCs, dioxins, dibenzofurans and
hexachlorobenzene (NY5DEC 3,1993). The contaminated sediment issues in these three areas
are being addressed by the respective PRPs. Within one of the areas, Gill Creek, sediment
remediation has been completed. In addition to these AOC specific sites, the previously
mentioned tributaries to the Niagara River have all been found to be contaminated with heavy
metals (NYSDEC 3,1993).
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
Recently, 76,000 cubic yards were removed as part of the Gill Creek clean-up. No
estimates are available concerning the volume of remaining contaminated sediments within the
Niagara River AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
The New York State Health Department has issued a 1992-93 fish and wildlife advisory
to eat no more than one meal per month of carp from the upper Niagara River. In the lower
Niagara River, the advisory is to eat no american eel, channel catfish, white perch, lake trout,
chinook salmon, coho salmon over 21", rainbow trout over 25", brown trout over 20" and carp.
In addition, along the lower Niagara River, it is advised that no more than one meal per month
be eaten of smallmouth bass, white sucker, smaller coho salmon, rainbow trout and brown
trout. These advisories were based on elevated levels of PCBs found in the specific species
during 1981 and 1984 NYSDEC sampling and 1987 U5EPA sampling. Elevated levels of
chlordane and mirex were found in american eel in the lower Niagara River (NYSDEC 3, 1993).
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
There are currently 5 sites within the Niagara River Watershed that are on the Federal
NPL. These Superfund sites are Love Canal, 102nd Street Landfill, Hyde Park Landfill, S-Area
Landfill and the Niagara County Refuse Landfill. To date, no contaminated sediments within the
Niagara River have been remediated in conjunction with any of these Superfund sites. There
are plans however for the 102nd Street Landfill PRPs to address the remediation of
43
-------
contaminated sediments in the later phases of the clean-up process. It is worthwhile to note
that work has been done to remove contaminated sediments from tributaries related to Love
Canal and Hyde Park.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
No dredging is necessary in most of the Niagara River because it is scoured to bedrock
and no sediments remain to be dredged. However, there was some dredging that did occur
within the Lower Gill Creek, one of the three embayment areas within the Niagara River AOC. In
1981, the PRPs, Olin and DuPont, voluntarily undertook a remediation project to remove
contaminated sediments in Gill Creek. Subsequent investigations of Gill Creek bottom sediment;
showed significant organic and Mercury contamination of the sediments in a 250 foot
unremediated stream section (NY5DEC 3,1993). This stream section was subsequently
dredged in a 1992 project and the removal of contaminated sediments has since been
completed. Additionally, the outer harbor area in the upper Niagara River is dredged by the
USACE when needed.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
As far as sediments are concerned, within the Niagara River AOC all work is being
conducted by PRPs. The contaminated sediment remediation of the Petit Flume and the 102nd
Street Embayment is still in the remedial design phases, however, after that phase is complete,
remedial action will commence. The State is providing an oversight role in the embayment
clean up.
State Requests
The only request that was mentioned for the Niagara River AOC involved the need for
EPA sediment criteria. Presently, it is known that areas of contaminated sediment in the Buffalo
Harbor that are contained in the Niagara River AOC exceed open lake disposal standards.
Without accepted criteria however, the degree of contamination cannot be determined. The
ability to classify the sediments will help with the remedial decision-making process.
Oswego River
Location of Site
The Oswego River, New York's largest tributary to the Great Lakes, is located in
northcentral New York and empties into Lake Ontario near the city of Oswego. The AOC is
located on the southeastern shore of Lake Ontario and is centered in the city of Oswego (Figure
21). The AOC is defined as: the area at the mouth of the Oswego River bounded by the
breakwalls and an imaginary line connecting the breakwalls, the Oswego River as far south as
the Varick dam and the shoreline area from the breakwall on the west to a point on shore
where a line extended from the breakwall on the east would meet the shore (NY5DEC 4, 1990).
Land use within the Oswego River AOC is primarily urban and residential. The Oswego River is
a valuable natural resource for industry, commerce and recreation in central New York State.
It is worthwhile to mention that, even though it is not located in the Oswego River AOC,
Onondaga Lake, a source of much contamination, flows directly into the Seneca River, a
tributary of the Oswego River. Because of this, the serious pollution problems of Onondago Lake
get carried directly into the Oswego River AOC.
44
-------
OSHECO HARBOR
Figure 21: The Oswego River Area of Concern
-------
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
For the Oswego River AOC, it is important to keep in mind that the contaminated
sediments within the AOC are not viewed as major problems because the levels of
contamination are marginal and fall within moderate to low levels. The exact extent of the
sediment problem is not known, but it is expected that the level of contamination is not high.
It is believed that the major contaminants polluting the sediments are mirex, PCBs and Mercury.
It is also thought that the PCB contamination within the Oswego River originates from Onondaga
Lake(NY5DEC4, 1991).
Results from 1990 USAGE Oswego Harbor sediment sampling for dioxin, mirex and
PAHs obtained the following results:
dioxin: none detected with a detect level of 1.8 to 2.8 pg/g
mirex none detected with a detect level of. 12 to .32 ng/g
PAHs: ranged from none detected (at 10 ng/g) to 201 ng/g
Much more characterization of the sediments remains to be completed.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
To date, there have been no estimates of the volume of contaminated sediments within
the Oswego River AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Currently, there is no AOC specific fishing advisory, however the AOC is affected by
lakewide restrictions for Lake Ontario.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Actions
Only one Superfund site, Volney Landfill, is located within the Oswego River AOC. Volney
Landfill is a likely source of PCBs. It was proposed for the NPL in 1984 and since has been
capped. Additionally, a selected clean-up plan for this site was expected sometime in late 1992
or 1993. Presently, however, no activity related to sediment remediation is occurring in
conjunction with activities at Volney Landfill.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Sites
There are no restrictions on the disposal of dredged material from Oswego Harbor. The
next dredging by the USACE is planned for June through October of 1993. This will be
maintenance dredging of the navigation channel and dredge spoil will be open lake disposed.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
Currently there is insufficient data to draw conclusions on the status of bottom sediments
within the Oswego River AOC. Investigations to determine the location and extent of the
contaminated sediment problem are needed, as is computer modeling, risk assessment and
remediation. Efforts are in progress to attempt to assess the sources of PCBs in the basin and to
collect more information on the sediments in general to help determine if removal/remediation
of the sediments is necessary. Prior to making decisions about removing the sediments, the
present focus is on identifying sources of toxics and removing those sources that originate
outside of the river. Critical components to the clean-up of this AOC are the Onondaga Lake
clean-up, inactive hazardous waste site remediation and CSO abatement. In order to prevent
recontamination, it will be prudent to remediate Onondaga Lake and other upstream sources
before undertaking remedial actions on contaminated sediments in the Oswego River.
45
-------
State Requests
Because the information is currently limited to data collected outside the navigation
channel, the State could use assistance in obtaining a better assessment of the levels of
contamination within the Oswego River AOC. The assistance for an expanded assessment
would be helpful if it was in the form of surficial samples and/or dated cores.
Rochester Embayment
Location of Site
The Rochester Embayment is located on the southern shore of Lake Ontario near the city
of Rochester, New York. A tributary of the Rochester Embayment, the Genesee River, flows in
from the New York/Pennsylvania border. Several other smaller waterways also flow into the
embayment. The AOC is defined as the nearshore of Lake Ontario within Monroe County from
the town of Greece to the Nine Mile Point area of the town of Webster (Figure 22). The AOC also
includes the lower Genesee River from the lower falls to the mouth. Land use within the
Rochester Embayment AOC is primarily industrial and residential.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Sediments within the Rochester Embayment AOC are polluted with heavy metals,
Cyanide and PAHs. The heavy metals of concern include Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Copper,
Lead and Manganese. A 1990 sediment analysis showed most pollutants in the Rochester
Embayment AOC to be in the "nonpolluted" or "moderately polluted" range (USEPA Region V,
1977). However, Arsenic, Barium, Manganese and Cyanide all fell within the "heavily polluted"
range (Monroe County, 1993).
As far as PAHs are concerned, analyses in a 1981 EPA study in the lower Genesee River
measured total PAH levels ranging from .66 to 5.91 ppm. Benzol(a)pyrene comprised
approximately 1/4 of the total PAH levels (Monroe County, 1993). These findings have been
disputed by more recent studies which found PAHs less frequently than the 1981 study. All
considered, not much sediment characterization work has been done within this AOC and the
extent of the contaminated sediment problem is still fairly unknown.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
There have been no estimates as to the volume of contaminated sediments within the
Rochester Embayment AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Currently, there is no AOC specific advisory for the Rochester Embayment. However, the
Lake Ontario advisory is applicable within this AOC. The Lake Ontario advisory recommends no
consumption of american eel, channel catfish, lake trout, chinook salmon, coho salmon over 21",
rainbow trout over 25" and brown trout over 20", and recommends "restricted consumption" of
white sucker, white perch, smaller coho salmon, rainbow trout and brown trout. The
contaminants responsible for these Lake Ontario advisories are mirex, PCBs and dioxin (Monroe
County, 1993).
46
-------
Scale:
5
10
Figure 22: Rochester Embayment Map
-------
Enforcement History Relating to Suoerfund Sites
There are approximately 83 inactive hazardous waste sites within the watershed of the
AOC that are on the NY State Registry as Superfund sites. There is additionally a significant local
effort to determine the location and contents of waste sites. However, no sites are currently on
the Federal NPL list. Only one site, Trimmer Road landfill, is being submitted for NPL status.
Therefore, no remediation of the sediments in Rochester Embayment is occurring under
Superfund.
Dredging History Not Related to Suoerfund Actions
As of 1992, sediments from the Genesee River were deemed suitable for open lake
aisposal. The harbor part of the Genesee River is dredged annually by the USAGE and all
dredge spoil is open lake disposed.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
There are no technical tools currently in use in this AOC in relation to the remediation of
the contaminated sediments. This is because the work in this AOC focuses on efforts to reduce
pollution in the watershed instead of removing contaminated sediments. The Rochester
Embayment RAP committee does not believe that removing the sediment is a good idea.
Consequently, most of the effort and funding within this AOC has been focused on a huge CSO
abatement program and on NPS pollution control measures within Monroe County. A good
deal of this work has been aided by information collected in the 1981 Monroe County Health
Department sediment toxics survey of the Genesee River which focused on pollutant loadings to
the Rochester Embayment.
State Requests
It was mentioned by the State that assistance in the form of benthic sampling and
testing would be helpful in order to determine what should be done about the impairment of
the benthos. When the RAP committee begins to address this impairment, it is believed that
they will then have to address the issue of the toxic sediments. At that point, they would need
assistance in obtaining more recent sediment data.
St. Lawrence River (Massena)
Location of Site
The St. Lawrence River includes areas of both New York State and Ontario, Canada.
The St. Lawrence River AOC is centered around Massena, New York, on the south shore of the
St. Lawrence, and is centered around Cornwall and Maitland, Ontario on the north shore. The
US St. Lawrence River AOC includes Massena, New York and the Akwesasne Indian
Reservation. The Massena portion of the St. Lawrence AOC (referred to as the Massena AOC)
can be defined as New York State's waters which include the New York portion of the St.
Lawrence River upstream of the Canadian boundary to the Massena public water supply
intake, the Grasse River from the mouth upstream to the first dam, the Raquette River from the
mouth upstream to the New York State route 420 bridge and the St. Regis River from the mouth
upstream to the dam at Hogansburg (Figure 23). Located within the Massena AOC are 2
Aluminum reduction plants, an integrated Aluminum production mill, an Aluminum foundry and
the village of Massena.
47
-------
Figure 23: The St. Lawrence (Massena) Area of Concern
dam
> Hogansburg
\ Lands of the '
STATE \ Akwesasne
».^;rllpf
> : •:': -iiJ^t" ' : li-i'ii'l!1"'.'!'!/
T r i I
O 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 m«t«rt
-------
As part of the sediment remediation process, the bottom sediments of the St. Lawrence
and Grasse Rivers in the Massena area have been listed by New York State as an inactive
hazardous waste site. The river segment that was listed as the inactive hazardous waste site
includes the St. Lawrence River from the St. Lawrence-Franklin County line upstream to Snell
Lock, along the south shore of the river excluding the shipping canal and the Grasse River from
the Massena power canal discharge to the river mouth (NY5DEC 5, 1990). Superfund is
additionally involved with three sites in the Massena AOC. Administrative Orders were designed
so that one facilities' investigative and remedial responsibility takes over where another facilities'
responsibility ends. Therefore, all major contaminated sediment areas are covered under one
of the three Federal Orders.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Within the Massena AOC, sediments in some areas have been determined to be heavily
polluted with heavy metals and PCBs. The heavy metals of concern include Arsenic, Chromium,
Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel and Zinc. It is generally known that the PCBs are concentrated
near the ALCOA, Reynolds Metals and General Motors discharge points, however more specific
characterization of the sediments for PCBs is still needed. Additionally, dioxin, mirex, DDT, PAHs,
phenols and hexachlorobenzene have been impacting the use of the Massena AOC.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
EPA has estimated that there are approximately 62,000 cubic yards of sediments with
PCB concentrations above 1 ppm that must be removed from the river system by GM.
Additionally, the selected remedy from the Reynolds ROD included the dredging and/or
excavation of around 51,500 cubic yards of sediments and shoreline soils with PCB
concentrations above 1 ppm (USEPA Region II, 1993). However, no estimates as to the total
volume of contaminated sediments within the Massena AOC are available.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Currently, in addition to the general state fish consumption advisories, there are specific
fishing advisories in effect in the Massena AOC for american eel, channel catfish, lake trout,
large salmon and rainbow and brown trout. The advisories are the result of sediment
contamination by PCBs, Mercury, mirex and dioxin. Due to this contamination, the Akwesasne
Mowhawk Tribe has been directly affected because fish and waterfowl have traditionally been
important parts of their diets.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
There are three Federal Superfund sites, Aluminum Corporation of America (ALCOA),
Reynolds Metals and General Motors (GM), within the Massena AOC that are presently
addressing the contaminated sediment issues within the St. Lawrence River. Additionally, the
NYS Superfund Program is addressing the terrestrial contamination at these sites. The major
substance of concern for these three PRPs are PCBs, although other contaminants are present.
ALCOA has already removed PCB contaminated sediments from an outfall and a small
marsh and currently, under Superfund, are scheduled to do a phase I removal of 15,000 cubic
yards of highly contaminated sediments in the Grasse River. This removal should occur
sometime next spring, with a ROD following the removal action in 1 to 2 years.
Reynolds Metal removed sediments below two outfalls prior to Superfund involvement in
48
-------
the site. Most recently, the Reynolds ROD has just been released and the description of the
selected remedy included two major divisions (U5EPA Region II, 1993):
1. Dredging and/or excavation of approximately 51,500 cubic yards of sediments and
shoreline soils with PCB concentrations above 1 ppm, PAH concentrations above 10 ppm
and total dibenzofuran (TDBR concentrations above 1 ppb from contaminated areas in
the St. Lawrence River and from the associated riverbank.
2. Treatment of approximately 14,500 cubic yards of dredged/excavated material with
PCB concentrations above 25 ppm by thermal desorption. Untreated sediments and
non-hazardous treatment residuals with PCB concentrations below 10 ppm will be
disposed on-site, preferably in the Black Mud Pond, and covered. Contaminants
condensed in the thermal desorption process will be transported off-site and burned at
a commercial incinerator.
General Motors used PCBs in a die casting process from 1959 to 1974. In 1990, EPA
proposed a remedial action for the first portions of the GM site that included dredging
approximately 62,000 cubic yards of PCB contaminated sediments. This remedial action will
involve dredging the sediments down to 1 ppm PCBs in front of the plant and down to . 1 ppm in
front of the reservation. The first phase of the dredging is scheduled to be completed by next
year.
Dredging History Not Related to Superf und Actions
There are currently no restrictions on dredging activities in the navigation channel of the
St. Lawrence River in the Massena AOC. Periodic maintenance dredging is required and the
most recent dredging was in 1988, during which 15,000 cubic yards were removed and in
1990, when 28,000 cubic yards were dredged. These dredged materials were deposited in an
approved upland disposal area after testing to determine if they meet land disposal criteria.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
Most of the remedial activity within the Massena AOC is occurring under the direction of
Superfund. They are developing the clean-up plans and deciding upon the clean-up levels for
the Massena sediments. After these Superfund and PRP activities are completed, more
sediment sampling will be conducted in order to directly pinpoint and highlight the location and
extent of remaining contaminated sediments. After the sediment investigations, risk
assessments will be performed before any more remediation of the sediments is attempted.
State Requests
It was mentioned by the State that it would be very helpful if some research was done to
determine what level of clean-up is needed to make the sediment "dean" to allow for delisting
the site as an AOC. Also it was believed that it would be good to have some data available as
to what should be the legitimate standard to determine clean-up levels; for example, is it
financial or is it to protect birds and fish or is it to protect human health. In answering these
difficult questions it was believed that the EPA sediment criteria, currently being developed,
would be very helpful.
49
-------
Figure 24: The Ashtabula River Area of Concern
-------
Ohio
Ashtabula River
Location of Site
The Ashtabula River is located in northeast Ohio and flows into Lake Erie at the city of
Ashtabula, between Cleveland, Ohio and Erie, Pennsylvania. The watershed of the Ashtabula
River includes the 6 surrounding townships of Ashtabula, Austinburg, Kingsville, Plymouth,
Saybrook and Sheffield. The main section of the river is 23 miles long and originates at the
confluence of the east and west branches, which are 10 and 16 miles long, respectively. Major
tributaries of the Ashtabula River indude Fields Brook, Hubbard Run and Ashtabula Creek.
Additionally, Strong Brook is a minor tributary to the river. The AOC includes the lower 2 miles of
the Ashtabula River, Fields Brook and the nearshore areas of Lake Erie (Figure 24).
Industrial development is concentrated along Fields Brook, which empties into the
Ashtabula River approximately 1.5 miles from the mouth. The main section of Fields Brook is 3.5
miles long and has 5 tributaries. Fields Brook has such contaminated sediment that it was
classified as hazardous and is presently being addressed by Superfund. All of the brook,
except for the very upstream segments, is identified as the Superfund site.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
The major pollutants contaminating the sediments of the Ashtabula River are heavy
metals, such as Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Chromium, Lead, Mercury and Zinc, and organics
such as PCBs, PAHs, hexachlorobutadiene, hexachlorobenzene and trichloroethylene. PCBs
have been found throughout the AOC at concentrations ranging from 0 to 660 ppm, with an
average of 11.9 ppm, however most other organics are more localized in certain "hot spots"
(OEPA 1,1991). The horizontal distribution of the sediment constituents shows the upper turning
basin to be a "hot spot" and a "sink" for the sediments. Concentrations, for the most part,
decrease down river toward the harbor (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1992). The upper
turning basin is such a "hot spot" because that is where Fields Brook flows into the Ashtabula
River and all the contaminated sediment being carried is thus deposited there. As for a vertical
characterization of the sediments, no one trend for vertical distribution was representative of all
parameters, however most concentrations increased with depth and then decreased.
Additionally, the sediment in the upper 2 feet was found to be less impacted compared to the
overall average (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1992).
The following concentrations of contaminants are a few examples of what levels have
been found in the sediments within the Ashtabula River AOC. These concentrations are from a
variety of sources and are summarized in Tatem, H.E., et al. (1990):
Arsenic 56 ppm PCBs: 120 ppm
Chromium: 2,200 ppm hexachlorobutadiene: 22 ppm
Lead: 350 ppm hexachlorobenzene: 32 ppm
Mercury: 4.7 to 14 ppm PAHs: 188 ppm
Zinc 830 ppm
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
It has been estimated that within the Ashtabula River AOC there are approximately
500,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment. Of this 500,000 cubic yards, 200,000 to 300,000
50
-------
cubic yards is T5CA material, which means it has a PCB concentration greater than 50 ppm.
Fields Brook has an estimated 40,000 cubic yards of highly contaminated sediment, while the
outer harbor of the Ashtabula River has around 100,000 to 200,000 cubic yards of moderately
contaminated sediment.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Due to elevated levels of toxic substances found in fish tissue, a fish consumption
advisory for the lower 2 miles of the Ashtabula River was issued in 1983. This "no consumption"
advisory is still in effect today and is applicable to all species. The advisory was initially issued
due to the high levels of PCBs found in fish samples from 1978 to 1981. In addition to PCBs,
other organic chemicals polluting the sediments were also detected in the fish tissue samples
including, hexachlorobenzene, hexachlorobutadiene, pentachlorobenzene, tetrachloroethane
and octachlorostyrene (OEPA 11,1991). Recent fish sampling has shown that concentrations of
contaminants in fish tissues has declined considerably, however the advisory will not be revoked
until further data is available.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
Fields Brook, which is a major tributary of the Ashtabula River, has been designated as
a Superfund site. In September, 1986, after two years of study, the U5EPA decided that
incinerating, solidifying and landfilling the contaminated sediment would be the final clean-up
method. Additionally, it was determined that two other studies needed to be conducted.
These studies were: 1.) identification of current sources of contamination to Fields Brook and the
development of ways to stop further contamination, and 2.) determination of the type and
amount of contamination in the Ashtabula River and Harbor. In order to address these studies,
three tasks were decided upon by Superfund and were proposed in the Fields Brook ROD. Two
of the three tasks directly address the contaminated sediment problem. The two sediment
related tasks and the current activities occurring in conjunction with these tasks are as follows
(USEPA Region V, 1993):
1. A sediment operable unit was created which involves the clean-up of contaminated
sediment in Fields Brook, its tributaries and the wetland and f loodplain areas. Work
within this unit is intended to determine the amount of sediment in Fields Brook to be
excavated, treated and disposed; the best means for incinerating the sediment; the
best means of solidifying the sediment before disposal; the best location for the
incinerator and treatment and disposal facility; and the amount of contaminated
sediment in Fields Brook wetlands and floodplains.
2. The Ashtabula River investigation was designed to determine the type and amount of
contamination in the river, the effects Fields Brook and other continuing sources have had
on the river's sediments, and the risks to human health and the environment that are
present. Within this investigation, USEPA has decided that a hydrodynamic and
sediment transport assessment needs to be done for the river study area. This will
assess potential scour and movement of contaminated sediments in the river. This
information will be used to determine any potential ecological and human risks posed
by the contamination and will assist in making final decisions on potential Superfund
remedies.
The PRPs are responsible for paying only the clean-up costs for Fields Brook. No decision has yet
been made concerning who will pay for the clean up of the river.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
The Ashtabula River has not been dredged since 1962. In 1979 and 1983, sediment
51
-------
sampling confirmed that river sediments were highly toxic and polluted. This complicated
dredging and disposal issues and required special treatment of these toxic sediments. In order
to address these sediments, dredging operations have been proposed and environmental
impact statements have been submitted by the USAGE. However, no dredging project was
attempted due to the inability to agree on a disposal site and the escalating cost of the
dredging. In June of 1992, a site was finalized for the disposal of the sediments from the
Ashtabula River. The use of this site involved the leasing of land from Conrail for 3 years, after
which the sediment has to be removed to a permanent location. The purpose of this was to
allow the sediment to dry out so it would eventually be easier to move. Before the Conrail site
could b« used, it first had to be rehabilitated into a suitable disposal site, and then, following the
rehabilitation, 23,500 ruble yards of sediment were scheduled to be dredged from the river.
After three years, the dewatered sediments will most likely be disposed upland and the old
disposal facility will be allowed to develop into a wetland habitat. This summer, the USAGE is
planning to dredge to 6 feet below Low Water Datum (LWD) in the river and to 4 feet below
LWD in the upper turning basin. The sediment that will be dredged does not contain high
contaminant levels and will be placed at the Conrail site. The dredging is scheduled to be
completed by September, 1993.
Additionally, commercial navigation at the mouth of the river has been impeded due to
the accumulation of highly polluted sediments that must be CDF disposed. In order to alleviate
this problem, a CDF is scheduled to be built by 1998. This CDF is intended to contain heavily
polluted sediments from the outer harbor and commercial navigation channel.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
As one of the 5 ARCS priority sites, a baseline human health risk assessment and a fish
tumor study were performed for the Ashtabula River AOC. In the human health risk
assessment, the study concluded that the greatest risk to public health resulted from eating
contaminated fish collected from the AOC. The study urged people to avoid eating bottom-
feeding fish, like carp, because they tend to accumulate unhealthy levels of pollutants (Crane,
J.L. (3), 1992). The fish tumor study sampled fish from the river, the harbor and an area near
the breakwater. The study was performed as a method of determining possible impacts of
contaminated sediments on resident fish populations. The analysis of the collected fish showed
that approximately 20% of the total catch had livers with preneoplastic lesions, with the largest
percentage having been obtained from the river. Therefore, it was concluded that there was a
higher probability of "tumors" in fish from the river as compared to fish from the harbor or
breakwater area (Mueller, M.E., 1992).
The hydrodynamic and sediment transport model that was proposed in the Fields Brook
ROD is an important technical tool that is presently needed. Before taking remedial action, it will
be helpful to assess the potential scour and movement of contaminated sediments in the river.
With this information, potential ecological and human risks posed by the contamination can be
identified and incorporated into the remedial decision-making process.
Much work has been done in an attempt to characterize the sediments within the
Ashtabula River AOC. Work within this AOC is at a point where decision-makers are
investigating options other than removing all sediments because complete dredging would cost
over $20 million. The possibility of dredging only the "hot spots" is also being investigated.
Decision-makers are trying to find the remedial option which will pose the lowest risk for the
lowest cost.
52
-------
State Requests
Since a high incidence of tumors was found in brown bullheads within this AOC, it would
be helpful to have a better indication of the impact of PAHs upon the river environment.
Additionally, it would assist in making remedial decisions if the risk to humans and the
environment was known for the present situation and for situations following various clean-up
scenarios. As soon as remedial decisions are made, funding for the remediation will be
needed.
Black River
Location of Site
The Black River is located in northcentral Ohio and flows into Lake Erie at the city of Lorain,
between the cities of Cleveland and Sandusky. The river extends south, from the city of Lorain
on the south shore of Lake Erie, about 15.5 miles to the city of Elyria. The Black River AOC
includes Lorain Harbor, which is defined by the inner and outer harbor, and the section of the
river between Lorain Harbor and the city of Elyria (Figure 25). The inner harbor consists of the
lower 3 miles of the river while the outer harbor extends from the mouth of the Black River to an
area within the confines of multiple breakwaters. When writing the Stage I and Stage II RAPs,
the Black River RAP Coordinating Committee is viewing the AOC as the entire Black River Basin.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Within the Black River AOC, the greatest concentrations of contaminated sediments are
found in the vicinity of industrial outfalls. Elevated levels of Cadmium, Copper, Iron, Lead, Zinc,
Cyanide, phenols, PAHs, oil and grease were present in sediments adjacent to the old US Steel
(now USS/Kobe Steel Company) Coke Plant outfall. This portion of the contaminated sediments
has since been dredged by USS/Kobe and the sediment contamination is believed to have
been taken care of. Before dredging however, sediment concentrations of PAHs ranged from
4.8 to 390 ppm.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
Approximately 50,000 cubic yards of sediments, previously contaminated by USX Coke
Plant discharges, were removed from the Black River in 1990. Estimates as to the remaining
volume of contaminated sediments are currently unavailable.
Fish Consumption Advisory
Within the Black River AOC, carp and brown bullhead have shown high body burdens of
PAHs, PCBs, DDT and several other pesticides. The PAH contaminated sediments are believed
to be the cause of a high incidence of tumors in the bottom dwelling brown bullhead
populations in the river. The discovery of high levels of PAHs and PCBs in carp and brown
bullhead resulted in the issuance of a health advisory in 1983 for the lower 5 miles of the river. A
fish consumption advisory for all species remains in effect for the Black River AOC.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
Presently, there are no Superfund sites within the Black River AOC that are responsible
for the remediation of any contaminated sediments. However, sediment remediation in
conjunction with an enforcement action, taken by USEPA against US Steel (now USS/Kobe Steel
Company), was recently completed, and it is believed that this activity has removed all of the in-
53
-------
Figure 25: Black River Area of Concern
0/*c* ff/vtr 0«*/n
-------
place pollutants from the Black River.
In 1979, USEPA sued US Steel for alleged Clean Water Act violations at its Lorain facility.
In 1980, USEPA and U55 filed a Consent Decree mandating USS to spend $4 million to suppress
dust. In 1985, EPA and US Steel filed an amendment to the 1980 Consent Decree under which
US Steel agreed to dredge sediments contaminated with PAHs and Cadmium around the US
Steel outfall. In 1990, USS/Kobe (formerly US Steel) began dredging approximately 50,000
cubic yards of sediments, pursuant to the 1985 agreement, at a cost of $1.5 million to
USS/Kobe. The dredged material was placed in a hazardous waste landfill located on
USS/Kobe property. All dredging was completed in December 1990 and .subsequent
sampling indicated that the contaminated material had be»n removed. USS/Kobe has
additionally closed down their coke plant and has significantly decreased the pollutant loadings
from the other outfalls.
Dredging History Not Related to Suoerfund Actions
Dredging of the navigation channel by the U5ACE occurs every year. The dredge spoil is
placed in a CDF located at the mouth of the Black River.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
The Ohio EPA completed an intensive survey of the Black River in October, 1992, and a
comprehensive report detailing the survey results is expected to be completed by August 10,
1993. The intensive survey involved the biological, sediment and water quality sampling of
multiple locations within the Black River Basin. One of the goals of this study was to evaluate the
effects of the toxic sediment removal from the river. It is expected that after this data is
available and can be incorporated into the Stage I RAP, that the RAP process will be able to
move forward. The Stage I RAP is expected to be available by late 1993. It is hoped that the
information from this intensive study will help in making decisions concerning what remedial
actions need to be taken and what further study needs to take place. If it is shown to be true
that the contaminated sediment problems have been removed by all the USS/Kobe dredging,
then the remaining remedial focus will be on controlling erosion and agricultural runoff.
State Requests
Currently, for the Black River AOC, there is a need for more fish tissue sampling data that
could help determine whether or not a fish consumption advisory is still necessary. This project
would involve three years of sampling and presently lacks funding. The data from last year
showed that the fish were fine for consumption and there is now a desire to open the Black River
for game fishing, but this cannot be done until more definitive results are available.
Cuyahoga River
Location of Site
The Cuyahoga River is located in northeastern Ohio and flows southwest from its
headwaters, turns north near Akron and enters Lake Erie through the Cleveland Harbor. The
AOC is identified as the lower 45 miles of the river and includes the portion of the river below the
Akron WWTP, the shipping channel and the nearshore area of Lake Erie inside the Cleveland
Harbor breakwater (Figure 26). The lower 6 miles of the river flowing through Cleveland are
considered to be the most degraded (Cuyahoga River RAP Coordinating Committee, 1992).
54
-------
Figure 26
CUYAHOGA RAP STUDY AREA*
Area of Concern
Watershed Boundary
•OWOEWSON
* Does not Include communities discharging to the watershed via
sanitary sewer lines tied Into the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District
-------
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Sediments within the Cuyahoga River AOC, specifically in the shipping channel, have
been determined to be heavily polluted with PCBs, PAHs, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Iron,
Lead, Manganese, Nickel, Zinc, volatile solids, Cyanide, DDT, phtalates, TKN, oil and grease. All
dredged sediments must be placed in a CDF. A 1991 Cuyahoga River sediment survey by
OEPA found the following maximum concentrations for these parameters (OEPA 2, 1991):
Cadmium: 7.60 ppm Manganese: 874 ppm
Chromium: 174.0 ppm Nickel: 391 ppm
Copper: 597.0 ppm Zinc 2,500 ppm
Iron: 41,700 ppm Napthalene: 7,200 ppb
Lead: 605.0 ppm Fluoranthene: 11,000 ppb
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimates are currently available as to the total volume of contaminated sediments
within the Cuyahoga River AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
On Lake Erie, a health advisory is in place warning people not to eat carp or channel
catfish caught from the lake because these fish have been found with levels of PCBs greater
than FDA standards. However, in the Cuyahoga River, fish caught along the entire length of the
river below the Ohio Edison Dam in Cuyahoga Falls have elevated levels of PCBs that fall below
the standards. Therefore, the Ohio Department of Health does not feel that a consumption
advisory is warranted.
Data reinforcing this decision was obtained from a 1989 fish tissue study, which found
that levels within the fish of 10 volatile organic compounds, 12 pesticide and PCB compounds
and 1 heavy metal, Mercury, did not exceed any current FDA action levels (Cuyahoga River RAP
Coordinating Committee, 1992). Additionally, fish tissue data from 1990,1991 and 1992 studies
should soon be available.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
Currently, there is no contaminated sediment remedial activity occurring in conjunction
with any Superfund sites within the Cuyahoga River AOC.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
The USACE dredges the navigation channel annually. This dredging includes the lower
5.6 miles of the Cuyahoga River and removes approximately 300,000 to 400,000 cubic yards of
sediment each year. The USACE additionally dredges the harbor area every 3 to 4 years and
removes around 25,000 cubic yards from the East Outer Harbor and 75,000 cubic yards from
the West Outer Harbor. Open lake disposal of sediments from the river and harbor has not
occurred since, respectively, 1968 and 1974. The Cuyahoga River AOCs situation is greatly
helped by the annual USACE dredging of the lower 5.6 miles of the river. This dredging
prevents a serious sediment build-up problem.
There is also some dredging that is done by businesses located on the Cuyahoga
Riverbank in order to maintain the areas around docks and marina slips. One-half of the
businesses find up-land disposal sites, while the other half of the businesses pay the ACE for
permission to dispose of sediments in the CDF.
55
-------
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
Much work has recently been done within this AOC to evaluate the PAHs in the sediment
for fish tumorigenic potential. A study was completed that focused on the Cuyahoga River, from
river mile 0 to river mile 91, and the river's tributaries. The results varied from very low to high,
with 11 sites rating high out of the 27 having usable data (Estenik, J.L., 1993).
The remedial process for contaminated sediments is presently at a standstill because of
the large amount of money that is needed to undertake some remedial activity. There is
presently no money available from the State or any PRPs.
State Requests
Because of the lack of funding, the characterization work on the sediments of the
Cuyahoga River AOC is not as intensive as desired by the RAP Coordinating Committee. It would
be helpful to perform more assessments of the sediments and currently, OEPA is trying to have
some sediment bioassays funded by USEPA. Specifically, it was mentioned that one area which
would be helpful to have characterized and eventually cleaned up is Kingsbury Run, which used
to be an open stream but is now a storm sewer. Kingsbury Run enters the Cuyahoga River at
approximately river mile 4.0 and has sediment problems caused by leaching, industrial spills,
illegal discharge and CSOs. Within the 1993 Cuyahoga River and Cuyahoga River Tributaries
Evaluation of Sediment PAHs for Fish Tumorigenic Potential, Kingsbury Run was rated as an
area with high tumorigenic potential. Presently, work on this area is stalled due to lack of funds.
Maumee River
Location of Site
The Maumee River AOC, located in northern Ohio on the western shore of Lake Erie,
includes the lower 22.8 miles of the river, containing the mouth of the river, Maumee Bay, the
nearshore area of Lake Erie southeast of the mouth and the lower segments of several
tributaries to the river and bay (Figure 27). The AOC includes direct drainage into the Maumee
River and Bay that is within Lucas, Ottawa and Wood Counties. This includes Swan Creek, Duck
Creek, Otter Creek, Cedar Creek, Grassy Creek, Crane Creek and the Ottawa River. The most
contaminated sections are the shipping channel in the lower 6.6 miles of the river, the Ottawa
River, lower Swan Creek, Otter Creek and the bay. The Maumee River is the largest tributary to
Lake Erie and.flows through both industrial and agricultural regions, including the city of Toledo.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
There is extremely limited sampling data currently available for the Maumee River AOC.
Once more extensive sampling is completed, however it is believed that most of the sediment
problem will be due to dumps and landfills that have been leaching contaminants into the river.
It is thought that these sites are a more significant problem to the condition of the AOC than the
agricultural NPS problems and the CSOs which are being worked on by the city of Toledo.
The only available sediment data is from 1983 and 1988 USACE studies and a 1986
OEPA study. The following points summarize the findings of the three studies (Maumee River
RAP Advisory Committee, 1990):
1. USACE shipping channel sediment data collected in 1983 and 1988 showed a serious
56
-------
Figure 27: Maumee River Area of Concern and Its Streams
-------
heavy metal contamination problem. The metals of particular concern included
Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Lead, Manganese and Nickel.
2. The 1986 OEPA data showed that only Cadmium was "non-polluted" at all sampling
sites within the Maumee River, the Ottawa River, Swan Creek, Otter Creek and Duck
Creek. All others, Arsenic, Chromium, Copper, Lead, Nickel and Zinc, had at least one
"highly polluted" and one "moderately polluted" rating. Arsenic was by far the worst
problem having the most "highly polluted" ratings (U5EPA Region V, 1977).
Additionally, there is contamination of the Maumee River sediments by PCBs, PAHs and
pthalates. The area with the most serious PAH and PCB contamination is believed to be the
Ottawa River.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
To date, no studies have been done to determine the volume of contaminated sediment
within the Maumee River AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
A public health advisory was issued in 1987 and 1988 against consumption of carp and
channel catfish taken from Lake Erie. This advisory affects Maumee Bay and the estuarine
portion of the Maumee River and was based on PCB levels, frequently exceeding the USFDA
tolerance limit, that were detected in these species.
Additionally, in April, 1991, the Ohio Department of Health issued a fish advisory for
channel catfish and carp in the Ottawa River. This decision was based on a fish filet sample
collected from the Ottawa River which was found to have a PCB concentration of 65 ppm. The
USFDA health standard for PCBs is 2 ppm.
Enforcement History Relating to Suoerfund Sites
Currently, there are no Superfund sites that are affecting the sediments within the
Maumee River AOC, however, two sites are being evaluated for placement on the NPL. Both of
these sites are landfills and are suspected of having serious leachate problems.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
The Toledo shipping channel, which begins at RM 7.0 and extends out into Maumee Bay
to LM 18, is vitally important to the economic well-being of the region, and is the only commercial
navigation route in the AOC. The USACE dredges approximately 1,000,000 cubic yards of
materials from the channel each year. Before 1975, the materials were disposed of in CDFs or
by open lake disposal. From 1975 to 1985, dredge spoils were placed in the currently active
CDF to protect the environment from contaminated sediments. In 1985, USEPA approved open
lake disposal of materials dredged from less polluted areas of the channel, if chemical analysis
showed that the materials to be disposed of were similar to sediment in certain areas of the
Western Basin where disposal had occurred in the past (Maumee River RAP Advisory
Committee, 1990).
Presently, the Toledo Harbor is dredged annually and the dredge spoils from RM 5.0 of
the shipping channel to 1-75 go into a CDF, while spoils from RM 5.0 out to the lake can be open
lake disposed. Since this situation has become complicated and controversial, there is work in
progress to develop a long-term dredged material management plan for the Toledo Harbor.
57
-------
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
At this time, there is work in progress to better assess the sediment situation in the
Maumee and Ottawa Rivers and other tributaries. This is happening as a result of a U5EPA
Region V grant. Sediment data from 1992 has not yet been interpreted, therefore it is not
available in published form. The 1992 data was used to pick 1993 sampling sites in addition to
being used for sediment characterization. After the Maumee and Ottawa Rivers are
characterized, the sediment situation in Otter and Duck Creeks will need to be addressed.
There is also a proposed sampling regime for 1994, which will include samples to be collected
in tributaries that were not sampled in 1993 and additional samples to be taken from sites in
the 1993 study where severity of contamination or suspected problems dictated a need for a
larger body of evidence.
State Requests
It was mentioned by the State that a lot of work is needed in characterizing the
sediments and therefore the funding of sediment studies would greatly help. Specifically,
assistance in sampling within the Maumee Bay is desired because very little research has been
done there. However, it is important to discover what is going on in the Maumee Bay area
since that is where the contamination from the Ottawa River is deposited. Baseline biological
criteria is also needed for the Maumee Bay nearshore area.
58
-------
Pennsylvania
Presque Isle Bay
Location of Site
In January 1991, the US designated Presque Isle Bay as the 43rd Area of Concern.
Presque Isle Bay, a shallow estuary with an average depth of 13.1 feet, is the oldest harbor in
the Great Lakes and is located in the northwest corner of Pennsylvania on the southern shore of
Lake Erie. The bay is bounded by Presque Isle to the north and west, and the mainland and the
city of Erie to the south and east. Principal tributaries to Presque Isle Bay are Mill Creek
(including Garrison Run) and Cascaae Creek. For the purpose of the RAP process, the AOC for
Presque Isle Bay consists of the entire bay and its tributary watershed areas (Figure 28). Land
use within the Presque Isle Bay Watershed is approximately 80% urban and 20% rural. More
than one-half of the total watershed is residential, followed by 16% open areas, 11 %
commercial, 8% public and only 7% industrial use (PADER, 1992).
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
The sediments within the Presque Isle Bay AOC have been determined to be
contaminated with heavy metals, Cyanide, Volatile Solids, oil and grease, and possible PAHs.
Heavy metals of concern include Arsenic, Barium, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Iron, Lead,
Manganese, Nickel and Zinc.
This AOC is still very involved in the initial information gathering stage. Based on the lack
of conclusive sampling data and acceptable sediment criteria, the State is currently not ready to
definitively say whether or not the sediments are seriously polluted and, if polluted, to what
degree. This issue is complicated by the fact that while most of the beneficial indicators show
that the condition of the sediments is not severely impacting the Presque Isle Bay ecosystem, the
large problem with tumors in brown bullheads would indicate otherwise. It is known that the
cause of the high tumor incidences is most likely contaminated sediments, however, much
information still needs to be gathered to thoroughly evaluate the problem.
One known fact is the texture of the sediment within Presque Isle Bay is very fine (silts and
clays) and it would be quite challenging to remove all contaminated sediments. In light of this,
instead of dredging, the remedial activities selected for Presque Isle Bay may be to cap and/or
lock the sediments in place.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
As of yet, no definitive numbers have been obtained for the volume of contaminated
sediments within the Presque Isle Bay AOC. The volumes have not been established largely
because there is no standard sediment criteria available to help determine what is and what is
not "contaminated".
Fish Consumption Advisories
There are no AOC specific fish consumption advisories for Presque Isle Bay. The
advisories issued to date apply generally to the PA waters of Lake Erie rather than to any
specific locations. Overall, Presque Isle Bay is considered a "very diverse and excellent fishery"
with over 40 species (PADER, 1992). The only species of fish considered to be in need of
restoration to a healthy status are brown bullheads, which have shown an incidence of tumors
and are believed to be affected by PAHs in the sediments or other tumor promoters.
59
-------
Figure 28: Presque Isle Bay Area of Concern and Drainage Basin
-------
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
Currently, no definitive link has been established between the contamination of the
sediments and activities within the Superfund sites in the Presque Isle Bay AOC.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
No dredging in relation to the remediation of contaminated sediments has ever occurred
within the Presque Isle Bay, however, both the harbor basin and entrance channel sites are
subject to periodic maintenance dredging.
Dredging by the USAGE occurs on an "as needed" basis and has decreased over the
last few years. The need for dredging is assessed annually and is generally influenced by the
severity of the previous years' storms. The outer harbor dredge spoil is usually open lake
disposed, while inner bay (harbor) sediments have normally been confined disposed in the CDF
located adjacent to the AOC. This is largely because the outer harbor sediments are sandy,
more coarsely textured and are less likely to absorb the contamination, while the inner harbor
sediments, normally finely textured, have a higher absorption capacity. In addition to the
USACE, local marinas also maintenance dredge sediments within Presque Isle Bay.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
Before beginning the process of developing sediment remediation alternatives,
additional sampling should be conducted with careful attention to undisturbed sediment
profiles, so that it can be determined whether the pollutants of concern are evenly distributed
throughout the bay or are located in specific "hot spots" (Potomac-Hudson Engineering, Inc.,
1991). This AOC is still predominantly in the sampling and information gathering modes.
Immediate future needs in helping to better characterize the sediment situation include
performing sediment toxicity testing and identifying sediment quality through the analysis of
sediment cores.
Within the Presque Isle Bay AOC there is also much work focused on the brown bullhead
tumor problem. It has been determined that the problem is carcinogenic and not viral, so the
PAHs in the sediments, the suspected cause, are currently being closely analyzed. Intensive
research is progressing in an attempt to pick up the link between the sediments and the tumors
in the brown bullheads.
State Requests
In general, it would be most helpful to the Presque Isle Bay RAP decision-makers if the
new USEPA sediment criteria were available to provide guidance in determining the level of
pollution within the sediments. The questions of whether or not the sediments are polluted and
to what degree they may be polluted could then be answered. In the meantime, sediment
coring studies and benthic community studies are presently in need of funding.
60
-------
Wisconsin
Fox River/Lower Green Bay
Location of Site
The Lower Green Bay and the Fox River are located in northeastern Wisconsin at the
southern end of Green Bay, Lake Michigan. Green Bay, into which the Fox River flows, runs
approximately 119 miles northeast to beyond the city of Escanaba, Michigan. The AOC includes
the city of Green Bay, the lower 7 miles of the Fox River from the last dam tc the river's mouth
and the south end of Green Bay extending north to Long Trail Point and Point au Sable (Figure
29). Industry and agriculture are highly concentrated in the r'ox River/Lower Green Bay AOC,
with a great concentration of pulp and paper mills located within the watershed.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Toxics, which originate from a variety of sources, have for many years, washed through
the watershed and settled into the bottom sediments of the river and bay. Thus, sediments
within the Fox River/Lower Green Bay AOC are now contaminated with PCBs, PAHs, heavy
metals, pesticides, oil and grease. The contaminants of greatest concern within this AOC are
PCBs. Concentrations for PCBs ranging from 0 to 220 ppm have been found throughout the Fox
River/Lower Green Bay AOC, with the maximum levels having been sampled from a 40 acre
"hot spot" of PCB contaminated bottom sediments in Little Lake Butte des Morts near Appleton,
Wisconsin. It is estimated that this "hot spot" contains around 18% of PCB mass in the Lower Fox
River above DePere Dam. The characterization of PCBs in the sediments within the Fox
River/Lower Green Bay AOC is fairly extensive, however, data concerning the rest of the
sediment pollutants is not as thorough.
The most recent levels of some sediment contaminants other than PCBs were
determined by the U5ACE in a 1988 sampling study and were reported as follows (EPA Region
V, 1992):
Cadmium: 4.10 to 5.90 ppm Mercury: .68 to 3.6 ppm
Chromium: 68 to 150 ppm Nickel: 20 to 26 ppm
Copper: 44 to 86 ppm Zinc 150 to 270 ppm
Lead: 130 to 210 ppm
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
It has been estimated that there are approximately 7 million to 9 million cubic meters of
contaminated sediment within the Fox River/Lower Green Bay AOC. Of this 7 to 9 million cubic
meters, 2 million cubic meters are located within the 32 miles from DePere Dam, upstream to
Little Lake Butte des Morts, while 5 to 7 million cubic meters are located in a 7 mile range from
the DePere Dam, downstream, to the mouth of the river. Additionally, it has been estimated
that there are 4,000 kg of PCBs upstream and 20 to 40,000 kg downstream of the DePere
Dam.
Fish Consumption Advisories
The contamination of some fish in the Lower Green Bay is so great that the WDNR has,
since 1976, issued warnings regarding human consumption of walleye, trout, salmon, white
bass, white suckers, carp and catfish. Currently, because of high levels of PCBs, fish
consumption advisories are in effect for most fish, except perch, within the AOC. Additionally, a
waterfowl consumption advisory exists for mallard ducks in river reaches between Lake
61
-------
Figure 29: Lower Green Bay and Fox River Area of Concern
LakM and Pond*
Cocporrt* Boundary
UC BowidaffM for ttia AOC
Watends
Seal* 1:100000
Wiaoorain D*panrn«nt of fiatunl RMOUTCM
BIM-QEO S«rvioM Section
D«o«mb«r198e
-------
Winnebago and the northeast limits of Kaukauna and within the Area of Concern.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
In 1988, U5EPA proposed the Fort Howard Paper Company sludge lagoons in the city of
Green Bay as a NPL site. No remediation of contaminated sediments within the Fox River/Lower
Green Bay AOC has occurred in conjunction with activity at this Superfund site.
Though it is not a Federal Superfund site, it is worthwhile to mention that the PCB
contamination at Little Lake Burte des Mods (LLBM) is being addressed. The LLBM Remedial
Investigation Project is a clean-up demonstration project directed by WDNR. No remedial
options have yet been selected, but the project is working to initially address the contaminated
sediments in the deposit containing the largest mass of PCBs (called "Deposit A").
Dredging History Not Relating to Superfund Actions
No dredging of contaminated sediments has occurred within the Fox River/Lower Green
Bay AOC. In 1993, the USACE maintenance dredging goal for navigational purposes was to
remove 400,000 cubic yards. This amount will be 200,000 cubic yards less than averages prior
to 1985.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
A very important technical tool that has been implemented within this AOC is the Green
Bay Mass Balance Study. This study represents the first attempt to fully account for every source,
all modes of transport and the various fates of a toxic industrial chemical contaminant in an
ecosystem. The principal benefit of the study was to enable the WDNR to evaluate the most
cost-effective remedies for dealing with PCB contamination. The Mass Balance Study was a joint
effort of USEPA, WDNR, Wl Sea Grant Institute and other agencies to provide key information
about the flow of toxic materials, specifically PCBs, Cadmium, Lead and dieldrin, into, within and
out of the Green Bay ecosystem. By monitoring and quantifying all sources of toxic materials,
information can be gathered about how toxics enter the bay, what happens to the toxics while
in the bay and how and when toxics leave the bay, if in fact they do.
The following information outlines preliminary findings and long term predictions based
upon results from the Green Bay Mass Balance:
1. 4,000 kg of PCBs are in the sediment of the Fox River between Lake Winnebago and
DePere. Most of the PCBs are in the top 35 cm of the sediment. 25,000 to 40,000 kg of
PCBs are in the sediment of the last 7 miles of the Fox River downstream of the DePere
dam. Much of this contamination is buried fairly deep with significant PCB concentrations
extending 5 meters in some sediment cores. Also, 8,500 to 15,000 kg of PCBs are in the
top 12 cm of the Green Bay sediments.
2. During the mass balance study year of 1989, 175 kg of PCB was transported over the
DePere dam in the Fox River, while 283 kg of PCB was transported from the mouth of
the Fox River to Green Bay. Almost all PCBs transported originated in the Fox River
sediments between Lake Winnebago and Green Bay. Point sources of PCBs accounted
for less than 1% of the total transport to Green Bay. The upstream load from Lake
Winnebago and the estimated load from urban runoff were also very small. The Fox
River accounted for about 75% of all PCB inputs to Green Bay.
3. Some of the more contaminated deposits upstream of DePere are expected to remain
pretty much in tact for more than 25 years with the potential to cause continued
contamination of local fish and aquatic life. PCB transport is predicted to follow a similar
62
-------
trend to the transport at DePere, but the trend is much more sensitive to variations in
future flows.
4. Remediation of 540,000 cubic meters of contaminated sediment upstream of DePere
was predicted to reduce the PCB transport to Green Bay over the next 25 years from
1,740 to 1,515 kg. Remediation would also eliminate the effect of some of the "hot spots"
on the local fish and aquatic life. An additional remediation of 4,300,000 cubic meters of
• contaminated sediment below the DePere dam is predicted to further reduce the 25
year transport to Green Bay to 931 kg.
AT; for another technical tool, in a project closely related to the Green Bay Mass Balance
Study, WDNR is conducting an assessment of the sources and movements o* PCBs in the Lower
Fox River. Through massive sediment sampling, the WDNR and the US Geological Survey are
mapping sediments, quantifying the presence and sources of PCBs and modeling the
movement of PCBs in the Fox River from Little Lake Butte des Morts to the DePere Dam.
State Requests
An important project for the Fox River is to perform a pre-remediation site assessment
for the Fox River, and Brown, Outagamie and Winnebago Counties. This would involve collecting
and analyzing sediment and water column samples from one to four soft sediment deposits in
the Fox River upstream of the DePere Dam. The sites were chosen by using a ranking system
based on a procedure which evaluated PCB mass delivery of pollutants to the water column
under varying flow conditions. The purpose of these assessments would be to characterize the
lateral and vertical extent of PCB contamination, determine physical characteristics of the
sediments and identify other pollutants which could affect a choice of remedial option. This
study would need to be completed to proceed to design and engineering phases of a selected
remedial action. Reid work for this project will hopefully take place from May to June of 1994.
Menominee River
Location of Site
The Menominee River is the boundary between northeastern Wisconsin and the Upper
Peninsula of Michigan. The river's headwaters originate in both states. The main stem of the
river flows between the cities of Menominee, Michigan and Marinette, Wisconsin before
emptying into Green Bay. The AOC includes the lower three miles of the river up to the second
Scott Paper Company Dam, the cities of Marinette and Menominee and the adjacent nearshore
area of Green Bay extending three miles north and south of the river mouth. Land use within the
AOC is primarily industrial and residential. Chemical companies, a paper mill, a municipal
WWTP, a ship building company and a foundry are located along the south shore of the river,
while another paper mill, shipping warehouse and municipal WWTP are located on the river's
north shore.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
A primary problem within the Menominee River AOC is sediment contamination by
Arsenic, a heavy metal. Sediments in certain areas of the river are highly contaminated with
Arsenic. The main source of Arsenic is the Ansul Fire Protection Company in Marinette that
produced herbicides. Arsenic contaminated salt was discharged directly into the river when the
company began operations in the 1950's. Ansul's property, some of the groundwater beneath
the site and the river's sediments adjacent to the site are currently contaminated with Arsenic.
63
-------
Sampling by the USAGE in 1986 found Arsenic concentrations between .5 to 1,953 ppm in the
sediments within the Menominee River AOC Later USAGE sampling in 1990 obtained a range
from 1.29 to 15.43 ppm (USEPA Region V, 1992). There is also contamination of the sediments
by Cadmium, Chromium, Lead, Mercury, Zinc, PCBs, PAHs, oil and grease.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
The only estimates of contaminated sediment were generated by the USAGE in 1986 for
navigational dredging. The assessment determined that the portion of the turning basin
needing to be dredged for navigational purposes includes some 40,000 cubic yards of
contaminated sediment. Of this total, some 28,900 cubic yards of sediment were estimated to
contain Arsenic concentrations three times greater than the 278 ppm that would be classified in
the RCRA program as a hazardous waste.
Rsh Consumption Advisories
Both Wisconsin and Michigan have issued health advisories for people who eat fish
caught in Green Bay and the Menominee River up to the first dam. In Wisconsin, there are two
sets of consumption recommendations, one for risks from PCBs and pesticides and one for risks
from Mercury. The species induded within the advisories are rainbow, brown and brook trout,
chinook salmon, smallmouth, rock and white bass, northern pike, walleye, perch, bullhead,
white sucker, carp and sturgeon. The consumption recommendations for these species vary
depending upon the size of the fish and the location from which it was caught.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
Currently, there is no remediation of the sediments occurring in conjunction with any
Federal Superfund site. However, there is important work in progress under a RCRA Corrective
Action Consent Order. The RCRA Corrective Action involves the Ansul Fire Protection Company, a
former herbicide manufacturing facility, which stored and discharged an Arsenic waste salt and
ultimately contaminated the groundwater and sediments. In 1981, in compliance with a
Consent Order issued by WDNR, Ansul pumped 16 million gallons of Arsenic contaminated
groundwater from the company's property. It was estimated that this action removed 95% of
the Arsenic from a sand layer 15 to 30 feet beneath the surface. In 1990, as part of the RCRA
Consent Order, Ansul submitted a RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) to assess the remaining
contamination. This plan was subsequently rejected by EPA in 1991 which noted that the
workplan was "extremely deficient and inadequate". A revised RFI proposal was submitted by
Ansul in 1992 and is presently being reviewed by EPA and WDNR. Initial review comments
indicate that the second RFI proposal is still inadequate to assess the site.
There is also valuable work occurring under a RCRA Corrective Action Order (EPA and
WDNR) and an Administrative Order to address a paint sludge contamination site and
investigate a historic PAH contaminated coal gasification site.
The paint sludge site is located along one-half mile of both off shore and upland areas.
This site was once the dumping grounds for a furniture manufacturing facility for more than 10
years. Work is presently underway to clean-up the sludge deposits averaging three feet thick
and containing Lead, along with other metals and organic compounds. A water proof dike is
being constructed around the contaminated site. Water inside the dike will be pumped out to
facilitate clean-up of the site which is expected to take place in 1994. To date there has been no
sediment removed or remediated at this site.
64
-------
Area of Concern
0 ICOO 2000 XOO WOO 5000
I I I I I I
*^ Menominee Drinking
. ,. _ Water Intake
Menominee, Ml
. . - . -.
- -*' '^rf* .•"."*
Marinette, Wl
Point Source Discharges
1. Scott Paper Co.
2. City of Marinette
3. City of Menominee
4. Ansul Fire Protection Co.
5. SpecialtyChem Products, Corp.
6. Waupaca Foundry
7. Menominee Paper Co.
-------
High concentrations of PAHs have been detected at the site of a historic coal gasification
operation. In 1991, solid phase toxicity tests with sediments collected from this site resulted in
100 percent toxicity using a 48 hour acute toxicity test.
Dredging History Not Related to Suoerfund Actions
Dredging of the turning basin has not occurred since 1962 due to sediment
contamination. Much of the Arsenic contaminated sediment in the turning basin would be •
classified as a hazardous waste if it was removed without first being treated. Maintenance
dredging of the shipping (main) channel to its current depth of 21 feet and the entrance channel
to its depth of 23 feet last occurred during the summer of 1991. Dredge* j materials were
disposed of in the Michigan waters of Green Bay about thrse miles north of the AOC.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
Most of the sediment related activity within the Menominee River AOC is occurring in
conjunction with the EPA/WDNR RCRA Corrective Action Enforcement Program and with an
investigation into coal tar (PAH) contamination of the river sediment adjacent to the Marinette
WWTP. Sediment sampling and analysts of the Lower Menominee River is needed in order to
compliment the ongoing planning and enforcement initiatives. This data will help better
characterize the sediment situation within the entire Menominee River AOC to assist in remedial
decision-making for sections of the river not being addressed by the enforcement activities.
State Requests
An extensive sediment assessment survey is needed for the Menominee River AOC in
order to determine the condition of the sediments. The proposed survey is recommended by
WDNR to be conducted in deposition zones adjacent or below six point source pollution
dischargers: Scott Paper, Marinette WWTP, Cify of Menominee WWTP, Ansul-Specialty Chemical
outfall, Waupaaca Foundry and Menominee Paper. In addition, samples have been
recommended to be collected in the Sixth Street Slip, the south channel of the river, the nearest
deposition zone adjacent to 2 CSOs and the turning basin adjacent to the Ansul Company.
Surficial grab samples and core samples would both be helpful.
Milwaukee Estuary
Location of Site
The Milwaukee Harbor is located on the Wisconsin shore of Lake Michigan. The
Milwaukee Estuary AOC includes the Milwaukee Harbor Estuary and the nearshore areas of
Lake Michigan, outside the Outer Harbor, bounded by a line extending north from Sheridan
Park northwest to the city of Milwaukee's Linnwood water intake. The Milwaukee Estuary
encompasses the lower 3.1 miles of the Milwaukee River downstream of the North Avenue
Dam, the lower 3.0 miles of the Menominee River downstream of 35th Street, the lower 2.5
miles of the Kinnickinnic River downstream of Chase Avenue and the Outer Harbor, the part of
Lake Michigan enclosed within the breakwalls (WDNR 1,1991). The AOC is primarily industrial
and contains large shipping and port facilities, while residential and commercial districts are
also present along the river.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Sediments within the Milwaukee Estuary AOC are heavily polluted with heavy metals,
65
-------
Figure 31: Milwaukee Estuary Area of Concern and Direct Drainage Area
I .x • ' tOUMOAUT Oirmi*
I ./^ MAIISHOIIC AHCA
Source: Wisconsin Department of Ntturtl Resources end SfWRK.
A* OUTVAIXf AM LOGAT1B AMUT t MLU AOOTM <
-------
PAHs, PCBs, pesticides, oil and grease. Heavy metals of concern include Arsenic, Cadmium,
Chromium, Lead, and Zinc. The pollutants causing the greatest problems in this AOC are PAHs
and PCBs. One example of this contamination is the Moss-American Superfund site, a known
source of PAHs to the Milwaukee AOC, which has a PAH concentration within the sediments
near the site ranging from 5.9 to 4,600 ppm (WDNR 1,1991). Sediment sampling results from
the Moss-American site have also indicated that background levels for total PAHs lie between
6.9 and 24 ppm. An example of the PCB problem, concentrations as high as 41,000 ppm, .
were discovered in recent WDNR analysis of sediment cores from Ruck Pond, a source of
contamination to the Milwaukee River. Some other ranges of sediment contaminants, obtained
from 1989 U5ACE sampling, are as follows (USEPA Region V, 1992):
Inner Harbor Outer Harbor
Arsenic 5.3 to 8.3 ppm Arsenic 1.4 to 12 ppm
Cadmium: 1.5 to 2.5 ppm Chromium: 23 to 650 ppm
Chromium: 200 to 3,100 ppm Lead: 3.6 to 120 ppm
Lead: 100 to 390 ppm Zinc 55 to 390 ppm
Zinc 240 to 420 ppm
Additionally, mass balance modeling conducted on the Cedar Creek (a tributary to the
Milwaukee River) impoundments has identified relatively confined deposits of PCB
contamination. However, there is limited knowledge of deposits of contamination on other
portions of the Milwaukee system. A study conducted by University of Milwaukee-Wisconsin
researchers found increasing concentrations of both PCBs and PAHs at increased depths within
the Milwaukee Estuary AOC. Because the cores were only approximately 1.5 meters in length,
the extent of contamination has yet to be determined. This study is considered preliminary, and
extensive characterization of the sediments within the Milwaukee Estuary AOC remains to be
completed. Some depositional areas were found in the study, but it has not been definitively
determined whether the contamination is concentrated in "hot spots" or if it remains relatively
distributed.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
No estimates are currently available as to the volume of contaminated sediments
present within the Milwaukee Estuary AOC. As part of the Cedar Creek Mass Balance Study, a
volume of 69,250 cubic meters was estimated for the total amount of sediment in Ruck,
Columbia, Wire and Nail and Hamilton Ponds, however, it was not determined what volume of
this sediment was contaminated. In addition, the UW-Milwaukee researchers estimated the
volume of soft sediment in the AOC proper. The method used was never verified for accuracy
and the study did not estimate the mass of contaminated sediment or the full extent to which
the sediment deposits were contaminated.
It is recognized that upstream sources of pollution, such as the Cedar Creek
impoundments and the Moss-American Superfund site, are contributing to the degradation of
the Milwaukee Estuary AOC. There is little information on the volume of contaminated sediment
within the three river systems in the basin.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Fish consumption advisories have been issued by the state since 1976. These advisories
are for both migratory and resident fish species and are based on levels of PCBs and pesticides
that exceed uniformly acceptable levels. Specifically, within the Milwaukee Estuary AOC, the
advisory recommends that the following fish should not be eaten because of contamination
66
-------
from PCBs and pesticides: crappie, northern pike, carp, redhorse, smallmouth bass and white
sucker. In addition to Lake Michigan carp and catfish, the following trout and salmon pose a
moderate to great health risk and should not be eaten: lake trout over 20", chinook salmon
over 21", coho salmon over 26" and any brown trout, especially those over 23".
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
The Moss-American Federal Superfund site, a source of PAHs to the Little Menominee
River, was placed on the NPL in 1983. This site is approximately 15 miles upstream of the AOC
and is 88 acres in size. The Moss-American site is a former wood preserving facility where
railroad ties ware treated with a creosote and fuel oil mixture. During operation, liquid wastes
were discharged to settling ponds which drained into the Lit*!e Menominee River. Environmental
problems observed at the site relate to the use and disposal of creosote, which resulted in the
release of PAHs to the environment. The Moss-American ROD proposed construction of a clean
channel to eliminate the river from coming in contact with contaminated sediments. This option
will entail rerouting the river to a clean area, remediating the contaminated sediment and
backfilling the existing channel with dean fill. It has been determined by WDNR that sediment
clean-up should be to 6 to 8 ppm cPAHs. The first year of three-years of Pre-Remedial Design
activities was initiated in 1992.
Dredging History Not Related to Superfund Actions
Prior to 1970, when the Milwaukee Harbor was dredged, the spoils were open lake
dumped into Lake Michigan. In 1975, the USAGE constructed a CDF along the shoreline in the
southern portion of the Milwaukee Outer Harbor. The CDF covers 53 acres and has a capacity
of 1.6 million cubic yards. It is expected that this one cell unit will be filled and capped in the
mid-1990s. The ACE is currently looking for other options for disposal of dredged material. It
has not been determined whether the ACE is looking to expand the facility, or whether other
disposal options will be selected.
The USAGE, the City of Milwaukee, the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District and
private riparian property owners all conduct maintenance dredging in the Milwaukee Estuary.
From 1978 to 1989, a total of 1,458,500 cubic yards of sediment was removed in conjunction
with maintenance dredging operations under federal and state projects (WDNR 1, 1991). This
dredge spoil was CDF disposed. The CDF is expected to be filled around 1997.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
To date, WDNR has not had the opportunity to perform extensive sampling studies in
order to better characterize the sediments within the Milwaukee Estuary AOC, but there are
hopes to initiate this data collection soon. Most work has been focused on the serious PAH and
PCB contamination at, respectively, the Moss-American Superfund site and the Cedar Creek
impoundments. None of the planned remedial activity has been started on the Moss-American
site, however, the consent decrees for remediation have all been signed. Currently, the PRP for
the site is awaiting permission by Milwaukee County to proceed with an assessment of the site.
Mass balance modeling initiated in 1990, was completed for the Cedar Creek impoundments in
order to obtain a better understanding of the loading and movement of PCBs from the
impoundments info the Milwaukee River.
Additionally, as part of the research for a second CDF, a study is being proposed that
will focus on routes of contaminant transport out of the CDF. The results of this study will help
determine what will be done to the CDF once it is filled.
67
-------
State Requests
The needs mentioned by the State for the Milwaukee Estuary AOC centered on plans to
perform sediment studies in order to better define sediment contamination throughout the AOC
and in the upstream reaches of the river systems. Specifically, sediment analysis is needed to
supplement the Milwaukee River Mass Balance Study. Currently, there is money available to
pay for water quality monitoring, but, no funding is available for mapping and sediment coring.
The State would like to collect TOO sediment samples to analyze for TOC, total PCBs and
congeners and PAHs. Additionally, assistance with the implementation of sediment remediation
of the North Avenue Dam impoundment would be helpful. The North Avenue Dam is a 92 acre
impoundment with sediment depth up to 15 feet, however, not all of the sediment is
contaminated. Finally, there is also a need for general soft deposit determination within the
Milwaukee Estuary AOC.
Sheboygan River and Harbor
Location of Site
The Sheboygan River enters Lake Michigan at the city of Sheboygan. The AOC includes
both Sheboygan Harbor and the lower 14 miles of the river from Sheboygan Falls to the harbor
mouth. Within the AOC, the river flows through the city of Sheboygan Falls, the Village of Kohler
and the city of Sheboygan. The river also has two major tributaries, the Mullet and Onion Rivers.
Land use within the Sheboygan River and Harbor AOC is industrial and residential, while land
use is agricultural along the tributaries from regions west of the city.
Contaminants Polluting Sediments
Sediments within the Sheboygan River and Harbor AOC are heavily polluted with PCBs
and heavy metals. PCBs are the most significant problem in the AOC, while metals such as
Chromium, Copper and Lead have also contributed to the sediment pollution. Analyses of
harbor sediments have indicated that the most highly contaminated sediments are located
near the river mouth, and exceed 50 ppm below a depth of 2 feet from the sediment-water
interface. PCB levels upstream of the Lower Kohler Dam in Kohler have been found to range
between 27 and 81 ppm. Sampling, in conjunction with various USEPA Region V Superfund
investigations from 1985 to 1990, discovered a maximum PCB concentration of 4500 ppm within
the AOC prior to remedial dredging. Currently, the maximum PCB concentration in the river is
503 ppm, but most of the river contains PCBs in concentrations less than 20 ppm. Additionally,
in some areas within the AOC, floodplain soils have been found to be contaminated with PCB
concentrations between 200 and 300 ppm.
Volume of Contaminants or Contaminated Sediments
In the upper river portions of the AOC, approximately 5,000 cubic yards of the most
highly contaminated sediment have been removed and are currently located in two holding
tanks on the Tecumseh Products Corporation property in Sheboygan Falls. No estimates are
available as to the volume of contaminated sediments that remain to be remediated from the
Sheboygan AOC.
Fish Consumption Advisories
Due to the level of PCB contamination in fish, a "no consumption" advisory has been
68
-------
-N-
Miles
Shcboygan
Falls
Wuerthed boundary —
V
\
Figure 32: Sheboygan River Area of Concern
-------
issued by the WDNR and the Wisconsin Division of Health for all resident fish species, including
smallmouth bass, walleye and panfish, as well as for migratory species such as chinook
salmon and steelhead trout. Despite the fish advisories, some people continue to consume fish
from the Sheboygan River and Harbor. The fishing advisory was established in 1978 due to
PCB concentrations in excess of the 2 ppm U5FDA health-based level.
In 1987, WDNR discontinued stocking trout and salmon in the Sheboygan River due to
elevated levels of PCBs within the river. In 1990, an experimental program was initiated to
determine the PCB uptake and body burden of small and adult steelhead and coho salmon.
The results of the study will determine the feasibility of the Sheboygan River as a stocking site for
Lake Michigan Fishes. This study will evaluate the levels of PCBs in returning migratory species,
and determine the feasibility of continued stocking in the Sheboygan River.
Enforcement History Relating to Superfund Sites
Much of the Sheboygan AOC comprises a Federal Superfund site, the Sheboygan River
and Harbor site. In 1985, USEPA nominated the 14-mile river and 96-acre harbor onto the
National Priorities List. In 1986, Tecumseh Products Company agreed to conduct the RI/FS for
this site. The RI/FS included collecting sediment, soil and water samples from the river and
harbor over a period beginning in May, 1987, to the present. At the completion of the Rl in
1988, a Remedial Investigation/Enhanced Screening (RI/ES) Report was completed. The RI/E5
summarized and documented the Rl activities and findings, and contained a preliminary
evaluation of potential remedial alternatives for addressing the contamination problems
associated with the site. The RI/E5 also induded an endangerment assessment that indicated
some conditions at the site present an unacceptable long-term risk to human health and the
environment (Blasland and Bouck Engineers, 1990). Upon review of the RI/ES, EPA requested
that the 3 sediment areas with the highest PCB concentrations be removed from the upper river
and treatability studies be conducted on the sediment.
The next phase of the project involved an Alternative Specific Remedial Investigation
(A5RI). The ASRI incorporated a number of studies, including the removal of approximately
2,500 cubic yards of sediment from the upper river; their placement into a Confined Treatment
Facility (CTF), a rectangular structure comprised of four cells in which bioremediation is being
studied; various other treatability studies of sediment treatment technologies; a pilot study of
armoring; and monitoring of water, sediment and biota. In January 1991, the Construction
Documentation Report documenting the construction, dredging and armoring activities was
completed. A draft ASRI Report was completed in March 1992, and discussed the results of the
various studies. These results are currently being evaluated and discussed. In addition, the
results of the pilot bioremediation study in the CTF are being evaluated to determine whether the
pilot study should be continued another year. The preliminary findings indicate that the pilot
study results have not achieved the same level of degradation as the bench-scale studies. The
pilot bioremediation project is being performed with technical assistance from the ARCS
Program and constitutes the Sheboygan AOC Demonstration Project.
A removal action was done in 1991. Approximately 2,700 cubic yards of PCB
contaminated sediment was dredged from the upper river and was placed into a Sediment
Management Facility (5MF-a tank) built on Tecumseh's property for interim storage. The Record
of Decision (ROD) for the site will determine the ultimate fate of the sediment in both the CTF and
SMF.
69
-------
Additionally, in 1984, the Kohler Company Landfill was placed on the NPL due to the
potential for groundwater contamination. This landfill is a probable source of pollutants,
including heavy metals, to the Sheboygan River and Harbor. The Kohler Company is the PRP for
the landfill and has also been identified as a PRP for the heavy metals contamination in the
Sheboygan River sediment.
Dredging Not Related to Superfund Actions
Sediment input to the Sheboygan Harbor is estimated to be 30,000 cubic yards per
year. In 1981,1984,1985,1987 and 1989, the USAGE dredged a total of 110,481 cubic yards
from the harbor mouth and used the dredge spoil as beach nourishment ar.d industrial fill. For
the navigation channel, however, no dredging has been initiated since 1969 because of
disposal problems associated with contaminated sediments.
Technical Tools In Use and Needed
Most of the technical tools in use within the Sheboygan AOC are activities being
performed in conjunction with the Superfund sites. Additionally, as one of the ARCS priority sites,
a human health risk assessment resulting from PCB contamination was performed on the
Sheboygan River and Harbor. Results from the risk assessment indicated that fish consumption
should be avoided from the Sheboygan River AOC. Of the spea'es collected, carp were the
most contaminated with PCBs. In addition, dermal exposure to floodplain soils appeared to be
of marginal concern under a reasonable maximum exposure scenario (Crane, J.L. (4), 1993).
The results of this risk assessment were not directly comparable to the human health
endangerment assessment given in the RI/E5 report because different exposure parameters
were often used.
State Requests
The State of Wisconsin indicated a need for assistance in funding a toxic congener
assessment of sediment deposits that would involve identifying longitudinal variation. It is
intended that Geographic Information Systems (CIS) be used to visualize those deposits that are
most highly contaminated and also those that are most toxic. Also needed are PAH
assessment and mapping within the lower Sheboygan River, and a determination of
contaminated sediment loadings to Lake Michigan. The determination of contaminated
sediment loadings would include a mass balance focusing on upstream to downstream
loadings at strategic positions in the river. Scenarios that would be analyzed are upper river
movement to Kohler Dams, movement from Kohler Dams to the Harbor and movement from
the Harbor the Lake Michigan.
70
-------
Summary
In concluding this report, it is worthwhile to provide a few remarks that summarize the
most frequently occurring state requests and comments that were provided during the
research. There were three areas addressed by a vast majority of the state contacts. The first,
and most often mentioned, area concerned the work of the ARCS Program. It was generally felt
that the ARCS work has been an integral segment of the overall sediment remedial process by
providing guidance and technical assistance to the involved slates within an organized
framework. The majority of state contacts mentioned that it will be very important for the ARCS
Program to be expanded to include AOCs other than the priority sites that have directly
benefitted from the past years of work.
Second, it was often mentioned that EPA's development of sediment criteria is integral to
the remedial decision-making process within many AOCs. The importance of the sediment
criteria has been, and will continue to be, a heavily debated issue. However, the belief that the
sediment criteria, once completed, will provide a clear-cut answer to contaminated sediment
remedial decisions is present. This most likely will not be the case. Apparently, there has been
a communication gap between the federal and state levels concerning the importance of the
sediment criteria. It would be helpful if this problem could be addressed by EPA in some
manner so remedial decisions within the AOCs are not stalled "because they are waiting for
sediment guidelines" before further addressing the contaminated sediments.
Last, it was also mentioned that it would be informative if a full-scale demonstration was
performed under the ARCS program so that the recovery process of an AOC could be studied.
While pilot demonstrations that remove a small amount of sediment for testing have been very
useful, a great deal more could be learned by completely remediating a site and monitoring
the response of the ecosystem. Complete remediation of an AOC is an area that has, as of yet,
remained untouched and providing an example for other sites to follow would be extremely
valuable. The only site specifically suggested was Manistique Bay, a relatively small and
contained AOC which has a clearly defined sediment problem.
This report was intended to provide an overview of the sediment issues and activities
that have been completed and are in progress within the United States Great Lakes Areas of
Concern. It is hoped that this report will create opportunities for information sharing between
AOCs in order to help the states with the monumental challenge of completely remediating
these sites.
71
-------
References
ARCS Program. Pilot Scale Demonstration of Remediation Technologies' Thermal Desorption
Unit on Contaminated Sediments from the Buffalo River (Draft). 1993.
Benzie, S. for MDNR. Strategy for Addressing Contaminated Sediments in the Detroit River
and Trenton Channel. June 21,1993. Surface Water Quality Division.
Blasland and Bouck Engineers for Foley and Lardner/Tecumseh Products Company. Remedial
Investigation/Enhanced Screening Report: Sheboygan River and Harbor. May, 1990.
Sheboygan Falls, Wl.
Blasland and Bouck Engineers for Tecumseh Products Company. Alternative Specific Remedial
Investigation Report: Sheboygan River and Harbor (Draft). March, 1992. Volume 1 of 4.
Sheboygan Falls, Wl.
Brandon, D.L., Lee, C.R., Simmers, J.W., Tatem, H.E. and Skogerboe, J.G. "Information
Summary, Area of Concern: Saginaw River and Saginaw Bay". 1991. Miscellaneous
Paper EL-91 -7. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS.
Crane, J.L.(l) for USEPA GLNPO. Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment: Grand Calumet
River/Indiana Harbor Canal, Indiana, Area of Concern (Draft). September, 1992.
Environmental Research Laboratory. Athens, GA.
Crane, J.L. (2) for USEPA GLNPO. ARCS Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment: Saginaw
River, Michigan, Area of Concern. December, 1992. Environmental Research
Laboratory. Athens, GA.
Crane, J.L. (3) for USEPA GLNPO. Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment: Ashtabula River,
Ohio, Area of Concern. December, 1992. Environmental Research Laboratory. Athens,
GA.
Crane, J.L. (4) for USEPA GLNPO. Baseline Human Healts Risks Resulting from PCB
Contamination at the Sheboygan River, Wisconsin, Area of Concern. February, 1993.
Environmental Research Laboratory. Athens, GA.
Cuyahoga River Remedial Action Plan Coordinating Committee. Cuyahoga River Remedial
Action Plan Stage I Report. June 1992. Cleveland, OH.
Estenik, J.F. Cuyahoga River and Cuyahoga River Tributaries Evaluation of Sediment PAHs for
Fish Tumorigenic Potential. February 1,1993. OEPA. Division of Water Quality Planning
and Assessment.
Hartig, J.H. and R.L. Thomas. "Development of Plans to Restore Degraded Areas in the Great
Lakes". Environmental Management. Volume 12. Numbers. Pages 327-347.
Hey and Associates, Inc. for IEPA. Waukegan Area of Concern Remedial Action Plan (Draft).
Januarys, 1992. Chapter5 (Draft). April 12, 1993. Chapter6,7 and 10 (Draft).
Septembers, 1992. Chapter8 (Draft). February28,1992. Chapter9 (Draft). October
72
-------
6,1992. Libertyville, IL.
IDEM. The Remedial Action Plan for the Indiana Harbor Canal, Grand Calumet River and the
Nearshore Lake Michigan. Stage I. January, 1991.
Maumee River Remedial Action Plan Advisory Committee. Maumee River Remedial Action Plan
Stage I Investigative Report. October, 1990. OEPA.
MDNR1. Remedial Action Plan for Clinton River Area of Concern. November, 1988. Surface
Water Quality Division. Lansing, Ml.
MDNR 2. Remedial Action Plan for Deer Lake Area of Concern. October 27, 1987. Surface
Water Quality Division. Lansing, Ml.
MDNR 3. Kalamazoo River Remedial Action Plan (First Draft). September, 1987. Surface Water
Quality Division. Lansing, Ml.
MDNR 4. Remedial Action Plan for Muskegon Lake Area of Concern. October 27, 1987.
Surface Water Quality Division. Lansing, Ml.
MDNR 5. River Raisin Area of Concern Remedial Action Plan (Third Draft). August, 1987.
Surface Water Quality Division. Lansing, Ml.
MDNR 6. A Sediment Survey of the Rouge River Basin. Wayne and Oakland Counties, Ml.
February-November, 1989. Staff Report. June, 1992. Surface Water Quality Division.
Lansing, Ml.
MDNR 7. Remedial Action Plan for Saginaw River/Bay Area of Concern. September, 1988.
Surface Water Quality Division. Lansing, Ml.
MDNR and OME. Stage I Remedial Action Plan for the Detroit River Area of Concern (Draft).
November 5,1990. Lansing, Ml and Sarnia, Ontario.
MDNR and SEMCOG. Remedial Action Plan for the Rouge River Basin. Volume 1: Executive
Summary. September, 1990. Prepared for: Michigan Water Resources Commission.
Monroe County Department of Planning and Development. Rochester Embayment Remedial
Action Plan (Draft Stage I). January, 1993.
MPCAandWDNR. The St. Louis River System Remedial Action Plan Stage I. April, 1992.
Mueller, Dr. M.E. for ARCS. Ashtabula River and Buffalo River Tumor Surveys Final Report.
December, 1992. U5FWS. Ann Arbor, Ml.
NY5DEC1. Buffalo River Remedial Action Plan Summary. November, 1989. Buffalo, NY.
NY5DEC2. Buffalo River Remedial Action Plan Annual Report. June, 1990. June, 1991.
June, 1992. Division of Water. Buffalo, NY.
73
-------
NY5DEC3. Niagara River Remedial Action Plan (Draft). March, 1993. Volume I and II. Division
of Water.
NY5DEC4. Oswego River Remedial Action Plan. Stage!. June 1991. Stage II. June 1991.
Division of Water.
NYSDEC 5. St. Lawrence River at Massena Remedial Action Plan Stage I. November, 1990.
Great Lakes Section, Division of Water.
OEPA 1. Ashtabula River Remedial Action Plan Stage I Investigation Report. December, 1991.
OEPA 2. Cuyahoga River and Nearshore Lake Erie Sediment Data (Draft). 1991.
PADER and the Presque Isle Bay Public Advisory Committee. Presque Isle Bay Remedial Action
Plan. December, 1992.
Potomac-Hudson Engineering, Inc. for PADER. Presque Isle Bay Ecosystem Study Background
Report. June, 1991. Bethesda, MD.
SAIC 1. Manistique River Area of Concern Remedial Action Plan (Revised Draft). July 1987,
McLean, VA.
SAIC 2. White Lake Area of Concern Remedial Action Plan (Initial Draft). April 28, 1987.
McLean, VA.
SAIC 3. Eighteenmile Creek/Olcott Harbor Area of Concern Remedial Action Plan (Initial Draft).
June 15,1987.
SAIC 4. Resources Conservation Company B.E.S.T. Solvent Extraction Technology Applications
Analysis Report (Final Draft). March 1993. Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory.
Cincinnati, OH.
Simmers, J.W., Lee, C.R. Brandon, D.L., Tatem, H.E., and Skogerboe, J.G. 1991. "Information
Summary, Area of Concern: Grand Calumet River, Indiana. "Miscellaneous Paper
EL-91-10. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vlcksburg, MS.
Tatem, H.E., Brandon, D.L., Lee, C.R., Simmers, J.W. and Skogerboe, J.G. "Information
Summary, Area of Concern: Ashtabula River, Ohio." 1990. Miscellaneous Paper
EL-90-22. US Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station. Vicksburg, MS.
United States and Canada. UC. Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement of 1978. Revised as
amended by Protocol. November 18,1987.
USEPA GLNPO. Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sediments (ARCS) 1992 Work
Plan. Chicago, IL.
USEPA Region II. Decision Summary, Reynolds Metals Company Site Study Area. 1993.
Massena, New York.
74
-------
USEPA Region V. Guidelines for the Pollutional Classification of Great Lakes Harbor Sediments.
April, 1977. Chicago, IL
USEPA Region V. Inventory of Contaminated Sediment Sites (Draft). Wisconsin Sites. July 31,
1992.
USEPA Region V. USEPA Proposed Plan for Torch Lake Site. May, 1992.
USEPA Region V Office of Public Affairs. Reids Brook Superfund Site Project Update. May, 1993.
Wayne County Department of Public Service. Rouge River National Wet Weather Demonstration
Program. 1992. Grant Application under Public Law 102-139, Section 104.
WDNR 1. The Milwaukee Estuary Remedial Action Plan: A Plan to Clean up Milwaukee's Rivers
and Harbor. March, 1991. Wisconsin Water Quality Management Program.
WDNR 2. The Sheboygan River Remedial Action Plan. July 1, 1989. Southeast District
Headquarters. Milwaukee, Wl.
Woodward-Clyde Consultants. Ashtabula River Investigation, Ashtabula, Ohio (Draft Report,
Second Revision). February 21,1992. Chicago, IL
75
-------
APPENDIX A
-------
Status of Beneficial Uses Within the U.S. Areas of Concern
Restriction* on Talrtlng olFlsh Degradation o< Fish Tumors Bird or Animal Degradation Restrictions Eutrophlcallon Restrictions on D»gr«dallor Added Costs to Degradation ol Lots ol Fish
Fish and Wild Ilia and Wildllls Fish or Wildlife or other Deformities or ot on Dredging or Undesirable Drlnklr^ Water Beach ol Agrlculure Plankton and Wildlife
Consumption Flavor Populations Deformities Reproductive Problems Banthos Activities
Indiana
Grand Calumet River/
Indiana Harbor Canal
Illinois
Waukeg an Harbor
Clinton River
Deer Lake/Carp River/
Carp Creek
Detroit River
Kalamazoo River
Manlstlque River
Muskegon Lake
River Raisin
Rouge River
Saglnaw River/Bay
Torch Lake
Whle Lake
Minnesota
St. Louis River/Bay
New York
Buffalo River
Eight eenmlb Creek
Nlagra River
Oswego Hlver
Rochester Embaymert
St Lawrence River
Onto
Astabula River
Black River
Cuyahoga River
Maumee River
Pennsylvania
Presque Isle Bay
Wisconsin
Fox River/
Lower Green Bay
Menomlnee River
Milwaukee Estuary
Sheboygan River/Harbor
1 1
1 U
N
1 U
1 L
* *
1 N
L U
1 U
1 N
1 N
* •
1 U
1 U
N N
N N
1 1
1 N
1 U
1 1
U U
N
1 1
L 1
• •
L 1
L U
1 U
L L
1 |
* *
1 1
L L
N U
1 N
1 N
1 1
1 U
Symbol Key
1 indicates the
L indicates the
N indicates the
U indicates it is
- indicates the
* indicates that
L
U
U
L
•
L
U
L
N
*
U
U
N
N
N
N
U
II 1 L 1 1 1 1
II U U 1 U U U
N N U
II N N 1 1 N N
II - -
• * * *••• •
II N NNNN N
UN L --UN U
II 1 1 1 1 1 U
LN N NNNN U
II N NNNN N
• * * •*** *
II 1 U 1 1 N L
L N L 1 N U U U
N 1 N N L N N U
IN 1 1 1 1 1 1
II N N 1 1 N 1
II 1 N 1 1 N 1
U 1 N U N U U U
i
•
i
i
.
i
L
I
1
1
*
1
U
N
1
I
1
impairment of the beneficial use
beneficial
beneficial
unknown
beneficia
a site did
use is likely impaired
use is not impaired
if the beneficial use is impaired
use is not applicable
not address IJC beneficial uses in RAP or has not submitted Stage 1
RAP
-------
APPENDIX B
-------
State Request Contributors/Contacts
Illinois — Waukegan Harbor
Mr. Robert Schacht
Illinois EPA
1701 First Avenue
Maywood, IL 60153
(708)531-5900
Indiana — Grand Calumet River/Indiana Harbor Canal
Mr. Joseph D. Thomas
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
504 North Broadway, Suite 418
Gary, IN 46402
(219)881-6712
Michigan - All Sites
Ms. Diana Klemans
Planning and Special Programs Section
Surface Water Quality Division
Michigan Department of Natural Resources
P.O. Box 30028
Lansing, Ml 48909
Clinton River
Deer Lake
Detroit River
Kalamazoo River
Manistique River
Muskegon Lake
River Raisin
Rouge River
Saginaw River/Bay
Torch Lake
White Lake
Mr. Bob Sweet
Mr. Roger Eberhardt
Ms. Susan Benzie
Mr. Scott Hanshue
Mr. Roger Eberhardt
Mr. John Wuycheck
Mr. Roger Jones
Ms. Cathy Bean
Mr. Greg Goudy
Mr. Roger Eberhardt
Mr. John Wuycheck
Minnesota — St. Louis River/Bay
Mr. Brian Fredrickson/Ms. Mary Schubauer-Berigan
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
Government Services Center
Suite 704
320 West Second Street
Duluth, MN 55802
(218)723-4663 or (218)723-4837
(517)335-4182
(517)335-1119
(517)335-4188
(517)335-4179
(517)335-1119
(517)335-4195
(517)373-4704
(313)953-1441
(517)335-3310
(517)335-1119
(517)335-4195
76
-------
New York
Buffalo River — Eighteenmile Creek — Niagara River
Mr. Rich Swiniuch
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
270 Michigan Avenue
Buffalo, NY 14203
(716)851-7070
Oswego River
Mr. Dick Draper
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
50 Wolf Road
Albany, NY 12233-3501
(518)485-7786
Rochester Embayment
Ms. Margy Peet
Monroe County Department of Planning and Development
47 S. Fitzhugh Street, Room 200
Rochester, NY 14614
(716)428-5336
St. Lawrence River (Massena)
Mr. Burt Mead
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
317 Washington Street
Watertown, NY 13601
(315)785-2514
Ohio
Ashtabuia River — Cuyahoga River
Ms. Julie Letterhos
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, DWQPA
P.O. Boxl049
1800 Water Mark Drive
Columbus, OH 43266-0149
(614)644-2871
Black River
Mr. Kelvin Rodgers
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
NE District Office
2110 E.Aurora Road
Twinsburg, OH 44087
(216)425-9171
Maumee River
Mr. Tom Balduf
Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
NW District Office
347 N. Dunbridge Road
P.O. Box 466
Bowling Green, OH 43402-0466
(419)352-8461
77
-------
Pennsylvania — Presque Isle Bay
Mr. Mike Zimmerman
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources
1012 Water Street
Meadville, PA 16335
(814)332-6942
Wisconsin - All Sites
Mr. Greg Hill
Great Lakes Unit Leader
Bureau of Water Resources Management
101 5. Webster Street
P.O. Box7921
Madison, Wl 53707-7921
(608)267-9352
78
------- |