EPA-440/5-78-012
               IN-PLACE POLLUTANTS
                IN TRAIL CREEK AND
              MICHIGAN CITY HARBOR,
                       INDIANA

                 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
                 Office of Water Planning and Standards
                     Washington, DC 2046U

                       February 1978

-------
                                CONTENTS

Section

   I.      INTRODUCTION

           A.   PURPOSE AND SCOPE

  II.      SUMMARY

 III.      CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS                             5

           A.   CONCLUSIONS                                             5
           B.   RECOMMENDATIONS                                         5

  IV.      MICHIGAN CITY HARBOR/TRAIL CREEK DESCRIPTION                7

           A.   USES OF THE WATER RESOURCE                              7
               1.    Navigation                                         7
               2.    Cooling                                           11
               3.    Propagation of Fish and Wildlife                  11
               4.    Wastewater Disposal; Drainage                     12

           B.   PREVIOUS STUDIES OF THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT            13

   V.      FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES                               19

           A.   FIELD SAMPLE COLLECTION                                19
               1.    Sampling Methods and Materials                    19
                    a.   Sampling Methods Common to All Stations      19
                    b.   Coring Methods Used with Each Vessel         22

           B.   ANALYSES OF CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES           22
               1.    Methods and Materials                             22
                    a.   Water Analyses                               24
                         (1)  Dissolved Oxygen                        24
                         (2)  Ammonia Nitrogen                        24
                         (3)  Heavy Metals                            24
                    b.   Bulk Sediment Analyses                       28
                         (1)  Percent Solids and Particle Size        29
                         (2)  Organic Pollutants                      29
                         (3)  Oil and Grease                          29
                         (4)  PCB                                     29
                         (5)  Arsenic                                 30
                         (6)  Other Heavy Metals                      30
                    c.   Elutriate Tests                              30
                         (1)  Ammonia                                 30
                         (2)  Heavy Metals                            30
                         (3)  PCB                                     31
                         (4)  Aeration vs. Shaking                    31
                    d.   Summary of Physical and Chemical Analyses    31
                                    iii

-------
                            CONTENTS (Cont.)

Section                                                             page

           C.   INVESTIGATION OF BENTHIC ASSEMBLAGES                   32
               1.    Methods and Materials                            32
               2.    Results and Discussion                           34

           D.   SEDIMENT BIOASSAYS                                    38
               1.    Introduction                                     38
               2.    Overview of Methods                              39
               3.    Results and Discussion                           40
                    a.    Sediment Preference  Test                    4o
                    b.    Bioassays                                   42

  VI.       INTERPRETATION:   CHARACTERIZATION  OF ZONES  WITHIN          47
           THE CREEK AND HARBOR

           A.   RELATIONSHIPS AMONG BIOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL-          47
               CHEMICAL DATA
               1.    Macrobenthos Investigation                       47
               2.    Bioassays                                        47

           B.   RANKING  OF ZONES WITHIN  THE HARBOR                    55
               1.    Criteria                                         55
                    a.    Biological                                  55
                    b.    Chemical                                    56
               2.    Rankings                                         56
           C.   SOURCES  OF IN-PLACE  POLLUTANTS                         56

 VII.       ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL  CORRECTIVE ACTIONS                 59

           A.   DREDGING                                              59
               1.    Present Plans for  Dredging  at Michigan City      60
               2.    Relationship of Dredging Plans  to  In-Place       63
                    Pollutants
                    a.    Corps  of Engineers Volume  Estimates          66
                    b.    Depth  of Cut                                 66
                    c.    Volume of  In-Place Pollutants               66

           B.   COVERING                                              67
               1.    Practical Considerations                          67
               2.    Possible Covering  Methods                         68
                    a.    Cover  Materials                              68
                         (1)  Inert Materials                         68
                         (2)  Chemically  Active Materials             68
                         (3)  Sorbents                               68
                         (4)  Sealing  Agents                          69
                                   iv

-------
                            CONTENTS (Cont.)







Section                                                             Page




               3.   Assessment of Covering Concepts                  69




           C.  SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL CORRECTIVE ACTIONS               70







REFERENCES                                                           71




APPENDIX A                                                           75




APPENDIX B                                                           77




APPENDIX C                                                           82
                                    v

-------
                                 FIGURES

Number

  1       Trail Creek,  Michigan City Harbor,  Indiana                       ]8

  2       Shoreline Activities and Other Features  of  the  Study Area        9

  3       Depths to be Provided by Maintenance Dredging                   10

  4       Stations Occupied by EPA Region V  Sampling  Efforts              18

  5       Station Locations Used in this Study                           20

  6       Schematic of Gravity Sediment  Corer                             23

  7       Apparent Effect  of Lead  Concentration on Toxicity of            49
          Michigan City Sediments

  8       Apparent Effect  of Cadmium Concentration on Toxicity of         50
          Michigan City Sediments

  9       Apparent Effect  of Volatile Solids on Toxicity of Michigan      51
          City Sediments

 10       Apparent Effect  of Oil and Grease Concentration on              52
          Toxicity of  Michigan  City Sediments

 11       Apparent Effect  of Percent Solids on Toxicity of               53
          Michigan City Harbor  Sediments

 12       Relationship  Between PCB Concentration and LC50 of             54
          Michigan City Harbor  Sediments

 13       In-Place Pollutant Areas Outside Navigation Project            64
                                  vi

-------
                              TABLES

Number                                                               Pag£

   1      1975 Water Quality Data for Trail Creek                     14

   2      Bulk Sediment Analysis Results from EPA Region V            15
          Sampling in 1970

   3      Bulk Sediment Analysis Results from EPA Region V            16
          Sampling in 1975

   4      Samples Collected at Michigan City/Trail Creek at Each      21
          Station:  Purpose and Handling

   5      Water Analyses (All Values in mg/£ Except pH, conductivity  25
          and temperature)

   6      Bulk Analyses of Bottom Sediment (all value mg/kg dry       26
          weight unless otherwise noted)

   7      Elutriate Test Results                                      27

   8      Comparison of Aerated vs. Mechanically Shaken Elutriate     31
          Tests for Two Stations

   9      Rank-ordering of Stations by Concentration of Each          33
          Parameter Measured

  10      Macrobenthic organisms in Ponar grab samples collected at   35
          stations in the Trail Creek Study Area, Michigan City,
          Indiana in April, 1977

  11      Percent composition and total taxa for macrobenthic         37
          organisms in Ponar grab samples collected at stations in
          the Trail Creek Study Area, Michigan City, Indiana in
          April, 1977

  12      Results of Sediment Preference Tests with Pontoporeia       41

  13      Summarized Data for Sediment Bioassays with Pontoporeia     43
          affinis

  14      Summarized Data for Sediment Bioassays with Daphnia         44
          galeata mendotae

  15      Summarized Data for 48-hour Sediment Bioassays with         45
          Cyclops bicuspidatus thomasi and Salmo gairdneri

  16      EPA Region V Bulk Analysis Guidelines  (14), Compared with   57
          Michigan City Data
                                  vii

-------
                             TABLES (Cont.)
Number
17        Summary of Areas and Volumes of In-Place Pollutants
          Compared to Proposed Maintenance Dredging
                                 viii

-------
                             ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
     The work reported here represents the efforts of a large number of
individuals.  Dr. Thomas McComish and Mr. Greg Asbury of Ball State
University were essential to the project in ways that could not be foreseen
at the outset.  Their tireless cooperation in the field, and their knowledge
of the study area, were of great benefit.  Especially valuable was their
arranging the use of the facilities of the Indiana Department of Natural
Resources as a base of operations.  Mr. Robert Koch of IDNR, in addition
to allowing our use of the facilities, was most helpful in sharing his
knowledge of the aquatic habitats of the Michigan City area.

     Drs. John Ayers and Marlene Evans of the Great Lakes Research Center,
University of Michigan (Ann Arbor) and the crew of the R/V MYSIS were most
helpful during the field sampling.

     Chemical analysis of sediments, waters, and elutriates were performed
by several laboratories in the Boston area.  Arsenic and PCS analyses were
performed by Herbert V. Shuster, Inc. Ammonia, TKN, oil and grease, and heavy
metals analyses were performed by Interex Corp.  All other analyses, as well
as elutriates and metal digests, were done at JBF, primarily by
Margolia Gilson.

     The difficult task of conducting sediment bioassays was performed by
Dr. John Gannon and Mr. Daniel Mazur of the University of Michigan Biological
Station in Pellston.  This effort produced useful data with techniques that
required some development because of the lack of standard methods for sediment
bioassays.  Sediment bioassays remain a research topic, and these workers
encountered and overcame several obstacles to produce useful results.

     Within JBF, much credit must go to Stephen Greene, without whose
crafty organization the field work on this project could not have been
completed in a successful and timely way.  Jaret Johnson was Project
Manager.

-------
                            I.   INTRODUCTION

      Increasing attention in recent  years  has  been  given to  the effects
 that  in-place  pollutants  in bottom sediments may  exert  on benthic  communi-
 ties  and  on aquatic  systems in  general.  Systems  of in-place pollutants
 result  from the fact  that many  pollutants  such as heavy metals  and pesti-
 cides are sparingly  soluble in  water and are often  sorbed onto  suspended
 particulates and hydrous  iron oxides that  sink to the bottom.   One critical
 question  that  must be addressed is whether the amelioration  of  pollutant
 discharges may be counteracted  by  in-place pollutants remaining from
 previous  years.   In other words, even "zero discharge"  may not  yield
 healthy aquatic ecosystems unless  in-place pollutants are removed  or
 inactivated.

      Recognizing these  important issues, Congress enacted Title I,  Section
 115,  of the Federal Water Pollution  Control Act of  1972,  PL  92-500,
 requiring  the  following action  of  the  Environmental  Protection  Agency:
                         IN-PLACE TOXIC POLLUTANTS

               Sec. 115.  The Administrator is directed to identify
               the location of in-place pollutants with emphasis on
               toxic pollutants in harbors and navigable waterways
               and is authorized, acting through the Secretary of
               the Army, to make contracts for the removal and
               appropriate disposal of such materials from criti-
               cal port and harbor areas.  There is authorized
               to be appropriated $15,000,000 to carry out the
               provisions of this section, which sum shall be
               available until expended.


     To identify the locations of in-place pollutants, the EPA let a contract
to JBF Scientific Corporation.  The scope of that contract included collection
of existing data on in-place pollutants and the setting of priorities defining
critical waterways.  The final report (1) did set those priorities while
pointing out that the locations on the priority list were tentative because
of the inadequacy of available data.  To augment the data base, the EPA has
let two site-specific studies that included field and laboratory investiga-
tions.  The first study (2), begun in the Spring of 1976,  investigated
Baltimore Harbor, a large marine embayment with a good pre-existing data
base, intensive industrial activity, and very active port traffic.  This
second site study has assessed Michigan City Harbor and Trail Creek,
Indiana.  Michigan City offers an excellent contrast to Baltimore Harbor
with respect to Section 115 because the water is fresh, there were few
data on in-place pollutants, industrial activity and its wastewater dis-
charges are less extensive, and harbor traffic consists almost exclusively
of small recreational boats.

-------
A.   PURPOSE AND SCOPE

     The purpose of this study was to define and assess the in-place
pollutants in Trail Creek/Michigan City Harbor and, based on that defini-
tion and assessment, to evaluate potential corrective actions.

     Michigan City Harbor and Trail Creek are likely to undergo maintenance
dredging in the near future for navigation enhancement.  The navigation
channel to be dredged includes most of the study area, and a confined up-
land area is planned as a result of considerable study by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers' Chicago District.  These facts have influenced the
scope of the investigation in the following ways:

     1)   Any recommendation from this study must take into account the
          future maintenance dredging of the navigation channel.  Even if
          dredging did not prove to be the best option from the standpoint
          of Section 115, dredging is a virtual certainty given the
          shoaling of the waterway and its effect on recreational boating
          and the local economy.

     2)   Areas outside the navigation channel have been investigated,
          and have been considered for possible inclusion in the dredging
          to be done.  For these areas, all other corrective actions  (e.g.
          burial or chemical treatment) are active choices, as is the
          choice of leaving the polluted sediments in-place.

The following two sections consist of a summary, and conclusions and
recommendations.  The report then presents a description of the study area,
the procedures and results of the field work, interpretation of the results,
and assessment of corrective actions that might be taken.

-------
                               II.  SUMMARY


     Michigan City Harbor and its upstream extension, Trail Creek, are
important waters in many ways.  They are stocked with, and provide
migratory runs for, salmonid species forming a vital sport fishery in the
Indiana waters of Lake Michigan.  They are the base of a large recreational
boating community, and of an active commercial fishery.

     Trail Creek flows slowly through the urban area of Michigan City,
and pollutants that have been discharged over the years have settled to
the bottom of these quiescent waters.   This study was undertaken to
evaluate the effects of the resultant deposits of in-place pollutants,
and to determine what if any corrective action should be taken.

     Field sampling of waters, sediments, and macrobenthos was conducted.
During the field work, waters and sediments were also collected for
laboratory bioassays.   Other laboratory work included physical and chemical
analyses of the sediments, chemical analyses of site water, and detailed
assessment of the macrobenthos.   These efforts showed that the sediments
of much of Trail Creek and Michigan City Harbor are toxic to several species
of desirable aquatic organisms,  and conducive to extreme dominance of a
few species that are known to tolerate grossly polluted benthic environments.
Although the overlying waters also show some signs of pollution, the fact
that salmonid migrations are supported indicates that severely toxic dis-
charges have been abated and are now evidenced primarily by the in-place
pollutants that were deposited in past years.

     It therefore appears that removal of these deposits would be a fruitful
and worthwhile operation.   Before such action under Section 115, however,
the importance of a large landfill on the bank of Trail Creek as a potential
source of future pollutants should be assessed.   If that landfill can be
proven unimportant, then hydraulic pipeline dredging followed by disposal in
a confined disposal facility (or several small facilities)  is recommended.
The cost of such a program could exceed $4  million, but some fraction of this
could probably be provided from funds that  the Corps of Engineers will spend
in any event to maintain depths  for navigation in the study area.

-------
                    III.   CONCLUSIONS  AND  RECOMMENDATIONS

A.    CONCLUSIONS

      1.    The waters  of  Trail  Creek show  signs  of  continuing  degradation
by  heavy  metals,  oxygen  demanding  substances, and  ammonia nitrogen.   None-
theless,  the stream supports salmonid migrations.

      2.    The sediments  in  Trail Creek and  Michigan  City  Harbor  contain
high  levels of  in-place  pollutants from the entrance to the Yacht  Basin
upstream  to the local wastewater treatment  plant.. The in-place  pollutants
in  this reach do  not  form localized "hot  spots", but are  relatively  uni-
formly distributed.   The deposits  of  in-place pollutants  consist of  oily
organic silt with high water content.   Below the deposits is  a hard,  con-
solidated clay  stratum.   The  pollutants  of concern  are organic  (volatile)
solids, oil and grease,  and heavy  metals.   PCB  is  present, but not in
unusually high  concentrations.

      3.    The macrobenthos  in  Trail Creek and Michigan City Harbor typify
a severely degraded benthic habitat.  Little difference in benthic  animal
assemblages was observed among stations within  the polluted reach.   Stations
near  the  harbor exhibited slightly more benthic species diversity  than
stations  farther  upstream.  Increased  diversity, however,  was not  related
to  lower  concentrations  of  in-place pollutants.

      4.    Bioassays with four  selected sediments overlain by  clean water
in  aquaria showed  a significant range  of  toxicity.   Toxicities of  sediment
samples did correlate with  the concentration of several pollutants,
suggesting that the bioassays  provided a  finer  distinction regarding  the
degree of  sediment pollution than  was  provided  by  studies  of macrobenthos.

      5.    Sources  of  in-place  pollutants  cannot be distinguished between a
large landfill  and a  nearby wastewater treatment plant.   An investigation
of  leachate and runoff from the landfill would  be  required to make this
distinction.  Direct  industrial discharges  to Trail  Creek  do not appear
to  be a problem.

      6.    The maintenance dredging for navigation  purposes planned by the
Corps of  Engineers, Chicago District will affect approximately half of
the polluted area  and will  remove  about one  quarter  of the volume of
in-place  pollutants.

B.   RECOMMENDATIONS

     1.   Although the data developed  in this study  provide some insight
regarding  the sources of in-place pollutants, the  role of a large landfill
could not be ascertained.  Definition  of the importance of this  landfill
would require long-term  studies of leachate and runoff.   This definition
should be done before taking any action to remove  in-place pollutants.
If the landfill is an important source, abatement of that source should
precede Section 115 action.

-------
      2.   Action to remove in-place pollutants from Trail Creek and Michigan
 City Harbor is recommended, if the landfill is not an important source of
 pollutants or if it can be abated as a source.  The only other likely past
 source of in-place pollutants, a wastewater treatment plant across Trail
 Creek from the landfill, has upgraded its processes in recent years.  There-
 fore, Section 115 action should not be frustrated by accumulation of in-place
 pollutants in the future.

      3.   Dredging, followed by confined disposal of the dredgings, is the
 only proven reliable method for dealing with in-place pollutants.  The
 total cost of disposal facility construction, of hydraulic pipeline dredging,
\and of operation and maintenance of disposal facilities, would probably
 exceed $4 million.   In a joint program of navigational maintenance and
 Section 115 action, some of this cost (perhaps 10 to 30%) may be recovered
 from Department of  the Army funds for navigation project maintenance
 dredging.

      4.   If such a dredging program is undertaken, the thickness of the
 in-place pollutant  deposits between the Franklin St. Bridge and the waste-
 water treatment plant should be more clearly defined.  Because vessels of
 sufficient size to  take deep cores cannot navigate within this reach, a
 means should be devised to take cores from each of the four bridges crossing
 the waterway in the subject stream reach.

-------
             IV.  MICHIGAN CITY HARBOR/TRAIL CREEK DESCRIPTION

     Trail Creek, with Michigan City at its mouth, is one of the few inlets
on the Indiana shore of Lake Michigan (Figure 1).  Trail Creek in Michigan
City is narrow, with a width of approximately 150 meters near its mouth and
only four to five meters at the upstream end of the study area (Figure 2).
Within the downstream reaches used for recreational boating, currents are
generally slow (<0.3 m/sec), but the smaller channel upstream of the muni-
cipal wastewater treatment plant carries a consistently higher downstream
current.  Water levels in southern Lake Michigan exert a strong seiche
effect on Trail Creek.  The flow of the surface waters of Trail Creek often
is reversed in the study area.  Such flow reversals were observed during
the field sampling phase of this study.

     The most numerous shoreline developments on Trail Creek are facilities
supporting recreational boating.  Other prominent facilities include the
Northern Indiana Public Service Company's (NIPSCO) Michigan City Generating
Station, public water supply and wastewater treatment plants, two manufac-
turing facilities, a. commercial fishing operation, and a U.S. Coast Guard
station.

A.   USES OF THE WATER RESOURCE

     The recommendations of this study must be realistic in view of present
and anticipated uses of the water resources of Trail Creek and Michigan
City Harbor.

     1.   Navigation

     Recreational boating and commercial fishing based in Michigan City
are very important factors in the local economy.  Much of the recreational
boating activity is stimulated by salmon and trout fishing in the Indiana
waters of Lake Michigan.  Access is available through launching ramps as well
as through the many local marinas.  Approximately 640 slips and nine
launching lanes are provided, as well as services such as marine fuel and
oil, ice, potable water, and boat hoists.

     Although Michigan City's waterborne commerce formerly included signifi-
cant tonnages of salt and grains, this traffic declined and ceased between
1965 and 1970.  Fresh fish is the only commercial cargo presently handled
through Michigan City Harbor.  Landings between 1965 and 1974 ranged from
51 to 371 tons, with the later years consistently showing landings above
100 tons.

     Because neither the recreational fleet nor the commercial fishing
vessels require a deep draft channel, the Corps of Engineers does not intend
to maintain the authorized 18-foot depth near the mouth of Trail Creek.
However, shoaling of the inner reaches of Trail Creek has resulted in plans
by the Corps of Engineers, Chicago District, for maintenance dredging.  If
funds are available for constructing a confined disposal facility on land
adjacent to Trail Creek, maintenance dredging will take place in 1978 or
1979.  Figure 3 shows the project depths to be maintained.

-------
Figure 1.   Trail Creek, Michigan City Harbor,  Indiana

-------
        LAKE  MICHIGAN
             OUTER
             (YACHT)
             BASIN
                               WATER
                               TREATMENT
                        NAVAL  PLANT
                       ARMORY
                                              RAILROAD  BRIDGE


                                                  SECOND  ST  BRIDGE
         FRANKLIN ST
           BRIDGE
NORTHERN
INDIANA PUBLIC
SERVICE CO.
GENERATING    MICHIGAN  CITY
STATION
TURNING
BASIN  NO. I
                                     MARINA        RAILROAD  BRIDGE

                                          TRAIL CREEK
TURNING
BASIN NO 2
                                             MILLER ST
                                               BRIDGE
                                                              T
                                                           MARINA
                                                   \
                                                                  \WASTEWATER
                                                                   TREATMENT
                                                                   PLANT
                                                     E ST BRIDGE,
          5CALE  IN FEET
        o  too 400   too   iioo  i«oo
       Figure 2.   Shoreline  Activities and Other  Features of the Study  Area

-------
LAKE   MICHIGAN
       TO BE MAINTAINED  AT  12 FOOT  DEPTH
        (AUTHORIZED  DEPTH  18 FEET)
                                 JO  BE MAINTAINED  AT   10 FOOT DEPTH
                                  (AUTHORIZED  DEPTH 18 FEET)
                                                  TO BE MAINTAINED AT 6 FOOT  DEPTH
                                                  (AUTHORIZED DEPTH  6 FEET)
                                                  UPSTREAM
                                                   LIMIT
  SCALE  IN FEET
0  ZOO 400   BOO   19.0O   ISOO
     Figure 3.  Depths to be Provided  by Maintenance Dredging

-------
      2.    Cooling

      The NIPSCO Michigan City Generating  Station's  cooling water  intake
 structures are adjacent to Turning Basin  No.  1, on  the  shoreline  of  the
 power plant property.  The volume of water  pumped through the plant
 typically  ranges from  100 to 225 million  gallons per  day  (mgd), based
 on daily operating data from July to December 1976  (3).  Cooling  water
 is discharged to Lake  Michigan, west of Trail Creek,  outside the  area
 under consideration in this report.

      Physical and chemical water characteristics near the intake  (Turning
 Basin No.  1) are shown later in this report to be more  characteristic of
 Lake  Michigan water than of Trail Creek water.  This  observation  cannot
 lead  to a  conclusion regarding the plant's  effect on  the movement of
 Trail Creek water without further study.  Two possibilities exist:

      a.    Turning Basin No. 1 at the cooling  water  intake is affected
           by the intake in that Lake Michigan water is  drawn "abnormally"
           far upstream into Trail Creek,  OR,

      b.    Turning Basin No. 1 contains a  high proportion of Lake
           Michigan water because of the hydrologic  characteristics
           of the site, and the cooling water  intake has little effect.

      Understanding of  the generating station's hydrologic effects, as
 well  as its thermal effects resulting from  the discharge of cooling
 water to Lake Michigan, should be improved  as a result of a program
 nearing completion by  the University of Notre Dame.   That program,
 sponsored  by NIPSCO, will include "identification of  boundaries of
 individual water masses and movements of  these water  masses in the
 vicinity of the generating station" (3).  The final report from that
 project should be released in the Fall of 1978.

      3.  Propagation of Fish and Wildlife

      Trail Creek is the largest Indiana stream tributary to Lake Michigan,
 and is very important  to the fish stocking  program of the Indiana Department
 of Natural Resources (IDNR).  A recently developed salmonid fish hatchery
near Michigan City provides stocks of coho  and chinook salmon and lake,
steelhead,  and brown trout.  Many of the young from this hatchery are re-
 leased into Trail Creek in the spring (several thousand were released
during the sampling work on this study).  Salmonids migrate up Trail
Creek from Lake Michigan to spawn in the fall.  Salmonids are the focus
of intense recreational fishing activity using boats berthed at or
launched from Michigan City.   Much fishing  is also done from waterside
 structures such as breakwaters.   Fish resources of Lake Michigan near
Michigan City have been reported by McComish  (4).   That study did not
 include Michigan City Harbor/Trail Creek,  and therefore is only of
 indirect interest to this report.
                                    11

-------
     4.  Wastewater Disposal; Drainage

     The Michigan City Wastewater Treatment Plant effluent is discharged
to Trail Creek from the plant site, which is noted in Figure 2.  Several
industries discharge to the municipal collection system.  These industries
have been characterized by a sampling program that has resulted in a
series of "industrial users," "industrial surveillance," and "industrial
pre-treatment" reports that were made available to this study by the
Michigan City Sanitary District.  Plating operations contribute small
amounts of cyanide and heavy metals to the sewerage system, but the
Michigan City Sanitary District monitors these discharges closely.  Because
of dilution and pretreatment, little or no effect on the treatment plant
or Trail Creek is evident.  Another industry's discharge is high in sus-
pended solids (primarily rubber), but the treatment plant has reported no
trouble in removing these materials from the wastewater.

     Stormwater overflows have been a problem in the combined collection
system at Michigan City, but the Sanitary District has been constructing new
storm sewers in a separation program begun in 1962.  This separation program
is alleviating the problem of raw sewage overflows during periods of high
rainfall.  As in all urban areas, however, the separated stormwater can still
be expected to cause water quality problems in receiving waters (i.e. Trail
Creek).  Prominent among these potential problems are biochemical oxygen
demand (BOD), suspended and settleable solids, bacteria, and oil and grease.

     Four other direct discharges to Trail Creek have also been identified:

          The Michigan City Water Works filter backwash enters Trail
          Creek approximately 600 ft upstream of the Franklin Street
          Bridge (Figure 2).  A study found that the suspended solids
          concentration of the backwash was a maximum of 87 mg/£.
          Suspended solids concentrations in Trail Creek returned to
          background levels within 30 minutes after backwash events (5).

          Wastewater from air pollution control devices at a manu-
          facturer of castings enters a storm sewer that discharges
          to Trail Creek 500 yards upstream of the wastewater treatment
          plant.

          A small metal fabricator has its own treatment facilities,
          and is planning to join the municipal collection system.

          A plastics manufacturer has a large septic system near
          Trail Creek, with possible entry of leachate into the
          stream.

None of these discharges appears to be a significant source of in-place
pollutants.
                                     12

-------
B.   PREVIOUS STUDIES OF THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT

     The following discussion is a brief background to the prior knowledge
about the aquatic environment of Trail Creek in Michigan City.  Much of
this report's reference to earlier work appears in the next chapter on
field and laboratory studies, and is intended to lend perspective to the
data developed in this study.

     Previous studies have included biological sampling, sediment sampling,
and water sampling.  Biological studies have been conducted by the
University of Notre Dame to assess the effects of the NIPSCO Michigan City
Generating Station on fish (3,6,7).  Reports received to date have contained
abundant data regarding fish and ichthyoplankton sampling, temperature,
conductivity, pH, dissolved oxygen, and residual chlorine.  The final report,
containing interpretations of these data, is expected to be released in
mid-1978.

     Other biological work has been conducted by Ball State University.
These studies (4,8,9) have emphasized zooplankton, macrobenthos, and fish
in the nearshore Indiana waters of Lake Michigan, but have not sampled the
area discussed in this report.

     Water quality in Trail Creek at Michigan City is monitored monthly
by the State Board of Health, Division of Water Pollution Control.  Some
of their data for 1975 (the most recent year for which data have been pub-
lished) are presented in Table 1, for two stations identified on Figure 2
(Franklin St. and E St. bridges).  The data show undesirably high levels
of several constituents.  For most parameters, water quality is slightly
better at the downstream station (Franklin Street Bridge), probably reflecting
the dilution of Trail Creek water by Lake Michigan water.  One exception
is fecal coliforms, which were consistently higher at Franklin Street than
at E Street, which is within sight of the Wastewater Treatment Plant outfall.
This trend probably reflects the importance of combined sewer overflows and
of urban runoff in bacterial contamination of Trail Creek.

     Sediments in Trail Creek were sampled and analyzed by Region V of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 and 1975.  Their data are
shown in Tables 2 and 3 for stations identified on Figure 4.  At the
time of submittal of the initial report on Section 115 to EPA (1), the
1975 sampling had not been done.  On the basis of the 1970 data (Table 2)
showing very high levels of several parameters including arsenic, Michigan
City was included in a group of six "Priority 1" waterways across the
United States most strongly needing further action under Section 115.
These data also were valuable in this study for identifying likely "hot-
spots" of in-place pollutants and for planning the field work accordingly.
For example, both sets of data indicated that the most serious apparent
problems with in-place pollutants were upstream of Turning Basis No. 1.
Sampling stations in this work were therefore more closely spaced upstream
of that location, and more widely spaced lakeward of that location.
                                    13

-------
                        Table 1.   1975 Water  Quality  Data for  Trail  Creek
E Street Bridge
Minimum
Maximum
Average
BOD5
1.6
3.9
2.5
Suspended
Solids
3
51
19
Volatile
Suspended
Solids NH3
1 0.80
24 4.00
7 2.27
Phos-
phorous
0.09
0.52
0.21
Oil &
Grease
1.0
29.0
13.7
Fecal
Coliform
(MPN/100 m£)
10
1700
172
Specific
Conductance
(pmhos/cm)
450
600
527
Pb
0.020
0.050
0.032
Zn
0.040
0.170
0.092
Franklin Street Bridge




     Minimum       1.4       1




     Maximum       3.2      32




     Average       2.3      12
 1      0.20     0.03     1.0




12      2.50     0.41    29.0




 4      1.22     0.12    11.9
  10




4700




1216
250     0.020   0.030




580     0.030   0.230




413     0.024   0.070
Source:  Indiana State Board of Health  and  Indiana Stream Pollution  Control Board  (10).




All units in mg/H unless otherwise noted

-------
               Table 2.  Bulk Sediment Analysis Results from
                        EPA Region V Sampling in 1970
Station:
Parameter
Oil and Grease
Ammonia-N
Nitrate-N
Organic-N
COD
Total Phosphorous
Total Iron
Lead
Zinc
Mercury
Total Solids (%)
Volatile Solids (%)
Specific Gravity
(no units)
Arsenic
70-2
391
None found
0.44
None found
3,975
56.8
2,182
13
16
0.06
67.7%
0.3%
1.6881
350
70-3
172
None found
0.13
81
4,420
95.1
2,572
21
20
0.02
78.3%
0.5%
1.9846
400
70-4
217
None found
0.13
68
3,285
126
3,111
11
17
0.06
76.0%
2.2%
2.0004
500
70-5
1,354
236
0.50
1,077
33,120
772
8,095
33
925
0.20
59.8%
3.9%
1.4883
2,200
70-6
16,870
845
0.79
4,823
316,380
8,695
31,937
244
10,897
1,8
25.4%
18.6%
1.1652
9,660
All units in mg/kg dry weight unless otherwise noted.
                                     15

-------
             Table 3.  Bulk Sediment Analysis Results from EPA Region V Sampling  in  1975
PARAMETER

Volatile Solids %
Chem. Oxy. Demand
T. Kjel. Nitrogen
Oil-Grease
Mercury
Lead
Zinc
MCTY 75-1
MCTY 75-2
MCTY 75-3
MCTY 75-4    MCTY 75-5    MCTY 75-6   MCTY 75-7
5.40
73,000
1800
2500
*
90
360
8.2
111,000
3100
4300
*
150
870
15.5
224,000
5200
11,000
*
270
2060
13.6
202,000
4300
7300
*
190
1430
19.9
309,000
7100
15,000
*
200
2050
17.4
274,000
4200
12,000
0.1
240
2000
15.8
254,000
5400
15,000
0.1
325
2340
T. Phosphorous
Ammonia Nitrogen
Manganese
Nickel
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Magnesium
Copper
Iron








23,

17,
720
93
510
55
6
70
63
56
000
56
000
1600
160
610
75
9
130
19
120
22,000
200
24,000
3600
360
790
0.0150
14
270
58
300
17,000
260
36,000
3300
270
620
105
13
200
36
200
13,000
190
26,000
6300
390
810
160
12
275
81
320
9800
180
25,000
3900
460
680
150
10
250
45
270
13,000
170
27,000
4700
380
690
140
8
280
61
290
9900
215
25,000
*Below detection limit (0.1 mg/kg)
                                  All values in mg/kg dry weight unless otherwise noted,

-------
          Table
3 (cont.)   Bulk Sediment  Analysis  Results from EPA Region V Sampling in 1975
PARAMETER

Volatile Solids %
Chem. Oxy. Demand
T. Kjel. Nitrogen
Oil-Grease
Mercury
Lead
Zinc
                MCTY 75-8

                    12.0
                195,000
                    4200
                  11,000
                     *
                     360
                    7160
MCTY 75-9

    16.4
 265,000
    5200
  15,000
     0.1
     270
    2470
MCTY 75-11

     9.4
 129,000
    3200
    7000
     *
     130
     705
MCTY 75-12

     16.6
  250,000
     4500
   14,000
     *
      290
     2710
T. Phosphorous
Ammonia Nitrogen
Manganese
Nickel
Arsenic
Barium
Cadmium
Chromium
Magnesium
Copper
Iron
                    3300
                     300
                     710
                     130
                      8
                     260
                     44
                     235
                 12,000
                     185
                 23,000
    5700
     210
     710
     170
      10
     325
      78
     360
  11,000
     215
  29,000
    2100
     340
     560
      90
       5
     155
      22
     125
    5800
      90
  19,000
     5000
      190
      750
      160
       14
      380
       80
      370
   11,000
      220
   28,000
*Below detection limit (0.1 mg/kg)
                                   All values in mg/kg dry weight  unless  otherwise noted

-------
            N
                              LAKE  MICHIGAN
                      ,70-1  OBS  ONLY
00
                                                                             V75- 9,12
                                  MICHIGAN  CITY


                       O 70-2   1970 SAMPLING  SITE



                       • MCTY 75-1  (975  SAMPLING  SITE
\\  MCTY 75-10

 \^£/   IfiAIL CREEK
  %?\
                             SCALE IN  FEET
                           0 too 4OO  900
                                       1100   1100
                                  Figure 4.   Stations Occupied by  EPA Region V  Sampling Efforts

-------
                     V.  FIELD AND LABORATORY STUDIES

A.   FIELD SAMPLE COLLECTION

     All samples for this project were collected between April 14 and 17,
1977.  The field crew consisted of cooperating groups from JBF Scientific,
Ball State University, and the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor).  Logistic
support was provided by the Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR).
The station locations are shown in Figure 5.

     1.  Sampling Methods and Materials

     The water depths in the area under study varied from a few cm up to
about 8 m.  The approach to the field work was to use the best equipment
that could be brought to each sampling station.  Accordingly, three plat-
forms were used.  In deep water (>2 m), the Research Vessel MYSIS of the
University of Michigan was used.  This platform offered the full complement
of sampling equipment and shipboard processing that was desired.  For
intermediate depths (1 to 2 m) a 19-foot research vessel operated by Ball
State University was used.  A small flat-bottom skiff made available by
the IDNR allowed access to very shallow upstream areas.   The principal
difference among platforms was in the ability to take sediment cores and
in the physical difficulty of retrieving ponar grabs.

          a.  Sampling Methods Common to All Stations

     Water samples were taken with Van Dorn samplers and were subdivided,
preserved, and stored for laboratory analysis of separate subsamples for
separate parameters.  All samples were taken from 1 meter above the bottom
except for stations with less than 1 m water depth.  Samples at those
stations were taken at mid-depth.   The handling of these separate water
samples is described in Table 4.  Field measurements were also made as
described in that table.

     Samples of benthic organisms were collected with a  ponar grab with
bite dimensions of 22 x 22 cm.  A single grab was collected at each sample
station by lowering the sampler onto the substrate at an impact speed of
about 0.3 m per second and retrieving as quickly as possible to the boat.
In the flat-bottom skiff, retrieval was by hand because  no winch could be
fitted.  Immediately after removal of the sampler from the water it was
placed in a large tub lined with a polyethylene bag.  The sampler was then
opened and contents were emptied and washed from the sampler into the bag
with site water.  Each bag was then marked for station identification and
tightly tied.

     All benthic biological samples were washed onboard  the RV MYSIS (in-
cluding samples taken from the smaller boats)  using an elutriation device
("Critter Catcher")  and washing small debris and substrate materials
through nitex screen of 0.5 mm square mesh dimensions.   Organisms and
large debris particles retained were collected in labeled jars and pre-
served in about 10 percent formalin.
                                     19

-------
N
LAKE  MICHIGAN
                                                                                             I3S
                                                                                                     14
                  SCALE  IN FEET
                0  200 400   «oo   Itoo   taoo
                              Figure  5.   Station  Locations  Used in  this Study

-------
     Table  4.  Samples Collected at Michigan City/Trail Creek at Each Station:   Purpose and Handling
Sample Description

WATER
(conductivity, temperature,
DO, pH in field)
SEDIMENT PONAR GRABS
(Immediate Oxygen Demand in
field on surficial sediments)
SEDIMENT CORES
sample top, middle,  bottom
Type of Container and Preservation

1-quart glass - cap lined
with aluminum foil

1-quart glass (5 m£ H SO.)

1-pint polypropylene
(2.5 m£ H2S04)

1-pint polypropylene

Four 5-gallon polyethylene
containers from one central site

Three 5-gallon polyethylene
containers from one site near
mouth of Trail Creek

Mason jars

5-gallon polycarbonate bucket
shipped and stored at 4°C.

2-quart polycarbonate wide mouth
Three 1-quart glass - wide
mouth cap lined with aluminum foil
     Purpose

PCB and Arsenic


Oil and Grease

Ammonia-N


Metals

Elutriate Test Water


Site Water for Bioassays



Benthic Analysis

Bioassay
Particle Size and
Elutriate Test, Percent
Solids

Blend and Divide from each
in laboratory:
  Sample Bottle - PCB and
    Arsenic
  1-pint glass wide mouth -
    TKN, Oil and Grease
  Remainder - Percent Solids,
    Volatile Solids, Metals
    Digestion

-------
          b.  Coring Methods Used with Each Vessel

     Stations occupied with the MYSIS  were  represented  by  cores  taken with
a gravity coring device as described schematically  in Figure  6.   A core
retainer was used to avoid loss of core material during retrieval.   As each
core was brought on board, the following procedure  was  observed:

          Remove core liner from pipe  core-tube

          Drill small hole immediately above sediment-water interface to
          allow supernatant water to escape

          Measure core length

          Extrude core from core liner, subdividing into samples of
          10 to 25-cm increments (3 samples maximum).

A clean core liner of acrylic material was  used for oacb coring  event.
Despite the use of 182 kg of lead and  300-cm core liners,  the longest core
retrieved was 76 cm.  Some cores terminated in a layer  of  hard clay, but
others were found to contain organic sediment to the base  of  the core.
Relationships between the length of the core sample and the length of in
situ sediment represented (always greater than the sample  length) are dis-
cussed in Appendix A.

     Cores were taken from the smaller boats with a coring device similar
in all respects to that used on the MYSIS except for size  and weight.  The
core liner was 61 cm long and 5 cm in diameter.  The direct pushing force
of an oar was used to achieve penetration because the usable  weights and
fall distances were inadequate.

B.   ANALYSES OF CHEMICAL AND PHYSICAL PROPERTIES

     1.  Methods and Materials

     The many types of analyses that were performed in the laboratory
involved several procedures that require detailed,  specialized description.
Those descriptions, including procedures for quality control, appear in
Appendix B.  Before proceeding to the discussion of results  in tte text,
one procedure - the elutriate test - should be described briefly.

     The elutriate test involves shaking a sample of sediment with added
water, followed by settling, filtering of the water, and analysis of the
filtrate.   Instead of shaking, aeration may be used to provide mixing.  Both
mixing methods were used  in this study.  The main reason for  performing an
elutriate  test is to simulate the interaction of a sediment  with water at a
dredged material disposal site or with water in a hydraulic  pipeline.  The
latter situation was simulated in this project.  Dredging at  Michigan City
would most  likely use a hydraulic pipeline dredge, and any release of
pollutants  to the carrier water in  the dredged slurry is of  interest.
                                     22

-------
Valve  to Permit
Escape of Water
                             Cable
                      \
                          r
                                   400 Ib.
                                   Lead Weights
                               Core Liner
                              Core Retainer
                               Nose
Figure 6.  Schematic of Gravity Sediment Corer
                        23

-------
     Data from the chemical and physical laboratory investigations appear
in the accompanying tables:  Table 5, Water Analyses;  Table 6, Sediment
Analyses; Table 7, Elutriate Analyses.  Selections of  stations for bioassays
and for intensive benthos evaluations were based on these data.   The
rationale behind those selections is discussed below.

          a.  Water Analyses

     The water quality data shown in Table 5 were developed for several
purposes:

          To assess the total aquatic system rather than only the sediments

          To characterize waters used in bioassay and  elutriate tests

          To compare present water quality with past conditions as re-
          vealed by earlier data and by the sediment characteristics.
          This comparison is useful for inferences as  to whether the
          sources of in-place pollutants are still important.

               (1)  Dissolved Oxygen.  Upstream of the wastewater treatment
plant and immediately downstream, D.O. levels were at  or near saturation.
Between the E Street and Franklin Street Bridges,  levels were as low as 50%
of saturation.  D.O. concentrations were higher lakeward of the Franklin
Street Bridge, but because water temperatures were lower, the water remained
slightly undersaturated.  Dissolved oxygen concentrations,  while below
saturation, are not so low as to jeopardize biota or other  uses  of Trail
Creek.  Without a mathematical model for dissolved oxygen in Trail Creek
it is difficult to separate the causes of the oxygen deficit and thedr
relative importances.   However, it appears unlikely that the wastewater
treatment plant outfall is the sole cause of the deficit.  Benthic oxygen
demands are also probably significant.

               (2)  Ammonia nitrogen.  The species NHo + NH  were observed
at quite high levels between the wastewater treatment  plant^and Franklin
Street Bridge.  These substances reflect the breakdovm of organic nitrogen,
and indicate organic pollution.  EPA1s most recent water quality criteria
document (11) recorouiends a maximum of 0.02 mg/£ as un-ionized NH~; at the
pH and temperatures in Trail Creek, the observed values of  NHo and NH>
(above 2 mg/£) indicate violation of this criterion.

               (3)  Heavy metals.  Of the metals selected for water
analyses, nickel,  lead and zinc appeared to be at levels worthy of concern.
EPA criteria (11)  stipulate that these metals should be present  in concen-
trations less than 0.01 times the 96-hour LC50 for the most sensitive local
organisms.  Since most bioassays with salmonids have found  96-hour LCSO's
for these metals typically less than 10 mg/£,  the values shown in Table 5 -
especially for lead -  can be considered as violating tre Federal criteria.
The cadmium levels shown may also be of concern; although concentrations
are low, the hazard of even low levels cf cadmium is great.
                                     24

-------
                   Table 5.   Water Analyses
(All Values  in mg/£ Except pH,  conductivity, and temperature)
Dissolved
Station
1
2
3a
4a
5a
6
7
8a
8b
8c
8d
8e
9a
9b
10
11
12a
12b
13c
13d
14
15
£H
7.2
7.2
7.1
7.1
7.3
7.3
7.3
7.2
7.4
7.1
7.1
7.2
7.2
7.3
7.1
7.3
7.3
7.4
7.1
7.3
7.3
7.4
Oxygen
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
8.
6.
6.
5.
5.
4.
4.
5.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
8.
10.
10.
10.
4
4
3
5
4
2
7
1
5
0
8
7
4
4
4
8
4
7
9
4
4
2
Conductivity
ymhos
200
250
260
205
210
260
340
410
430
450
450
430
720
405
400
405
410
410
385
410
405
400
Tempera- „„ XT
ture °C
10
16
12
11
12
13
15
15
17
17
17
17
15
15
15
15
15
15
16
17
17
17
3
0.
0.


0.


1.

2.

1.


0.



2.
3.

0.
; PCB
40 <0.01
31


33


33 <0.01

20

92


95



57
03 <0.01

17
Cd
0.002

0.02

0.03


0.02

0.01

0.04


0.04



0.04
0.02

0.002
Cu
0.02

0.01

0.03


0.02

0.03

0.02


0.02



0.04
0.02

0.01
Ni
0.15

0.18

0.10


0.15

0.09

0.19


0.16



0.12
0.23

0.18
Pb
0.88

0.71

0.50


0.63

0.79

0.97


0.74



0.64
0.85

2.80
Zn As
0.

0.

0.


0.

0.

0.


0.



0.
0.

0.
09 <0.

10

06 <0.


21 <0.

24

15 <0.


26 <0.



31
34 <0.

16

-------
Ni
ON
                                   Table  6.  Bulk Analyses of Bottom Sediment

                               (all values mg/kg dry weight unless otherwise noted)
Depth Range
Below Water/
Station Sediment
No.
1
2
3A
3B
3C
4A
4A
4A
5A
5B
5C
6
6
6
7
7
8A
8B
8C
8C
8D
8E
9A
9B
10
11
11
12A
12A
12B
13B
13C
13D
14
Interface
(cm)
0-10
0-15
0-11
0-13
0-18
0-20
20-40
40-60
0-13
0-25
0-23
0-25
25-50
50-74
0-18
36-53
0-10
0-10
0-22
22-43
0-18
0-15
0-23
0-10
0-10
0-10
10-20
0-13
13-25
0-13
0-8
0-8
0-8
0-8
Percent
Solids
68.8
45.6
67.3
51.0
39.5
41.7
44.1
46.3
29.7
31.3
31.5
25.4
30.4
31.0
24.8
22.6
37.9
31.1
42.9
47.3
32.0
25.0

60.1
41.9
34.2
27.8
37.5
54.2
72. 3
36.4
79.5
70.0
80.1
Percent
Volatile
Solids
0.8
5.6
1.9
5.1
10.4
8.9

9.2
17.0
14.9
15.3
18.7
17.8
17.8
18.7
2.1
15.0
16.5
13.0
10.1
15.7
18.2

1.9
10.5
12.3
18.4
13.2
5.7
4.3
13.3
1.3
3.6
0.5
Particle Si
Percent
Sand
92.8
17.2
66.4


8.5


3.0
2.0
0
0


10.3

88.0
13.0
13.8

2.0
26.8
15.7
91.1
43.0
54.0

22.0

24.3
10.0
97.5
1.0
96.2
Percent
Silt
5.6
62.6
26.6


70.5


78.8
80.2
87.3
86.0


76.9

5.7
72.3
75.4

83.0
71.0
73.3
7.2
53.4
37.3

74.5

6E.4
67.5
1.2
93.0
2.7
ze
Percent
Clay
1.6
20.2
7.0


21.0


18.2
17.8
12.7
14.0


12.8

6.3
14.7
10.8

15.0
2.2
11.0
1.7
3.6
8.7

3.5

7.3
22.5
1.3
6.0
1.1

Immed
Oxygen
(mg 0,,/gm
<0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.


1 .
1 .
1.
1.




0.
1.
0.

1.
1.

0.
0.
0.

0.

0.
0.
<-o.
0.
<0.

late
Demand
dry wt)
1
46
25
4
94
77


31
02
21
61




9
09
89

06
12

1
64
41

67

76
74
1
47
1


TKN
100
3500
1200


13400

4800
10800
670
860
27600
440
370
13700
5900
8400
10300
7200
6600
940
800
1100
1800
670
5600
13300
930
4200
1700
960
380
1600
370

Oil
and
Grease
1200
3500
2800


6000

4300
7700
9300
9800
12600
3800
1100
15300
14200
10600
17000
13500
7400
6600
5600
1200
1700
6200
13500
14400
8300
4100
1800
1900
1100
2100
370


PCB
<0.01
'0.01
0.14
0.12
0.35
1.10
0.45
<0.01
0.69
0.40
0.32
0.38
0.69
<0.01
0.53

0.33
<0.01
0.72

0.88
'0.01

0.04

0.32

<0.01

<0.01

<0.01
0.15
<0.01


Arsenic
< 0.1
10.9
5.4
1 .3
2.4
11.3
3.6
12.5
21.6
1.3
1.9
1.9
1.8
1 .3
10.5
21.7
16.7
15.8
10.7
11.6
1.8
2.1
0.8
3.8
0.8
8.8
17.3
1.4
4.2
2.1
0.7
3.7
2.4
2.3


Cadmium
1
7
5

,•
26

11
67
53
49
82
78
46
63
60
41
59
42
35
46
54
70
5
37
55
74
35
21
6
6
7
8
1


Copper
1
22
10


27

38
65
16
14
79
23
14
71
68
56
87
77
57
16
17
23
15
14
72
76
14
28
15
2
17
18
2


Nickel
9
55
30


86

84
219
105
136
255
153
93
179
230
178
167
135
93
142
120
193
47
116
119
133
152
114
34
16
31
50
17


Lead
21
170
180


250

280
410
360
280
430
340
390
430
360
510
470
540
370
410
580
440
130
230
450
590
210
140
83
9. 3
110
85
3.1


Zinc
29
1400
230


1900

600
2900
1600
1600
3350
2800
1800
3180
2800
2400
3500
3400
2700
1500
1200
3000
2100
1300
4700
4590
1300
1100
280
32
300
260
50

-------
Sample
1A
IS
2A
2S
3AA
4AA
5AA
5AS
7A
7S
8AA
8CA
11A
13CA
13DA
13DS
14A
8A
A = Aerated
S = Shake
3~ Cd
0.19
0.21
0.21
2.0
64
41
160
18
120
61
54
40
42
33
44
98
2.0
0.18
0.01
0.24
0.02
0.03
0.24
0.05
<0.01
0.02
0.04
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
0.01
0.01
Cu
0.01
0.01
0.01
<0.01
0.01
0.06
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.04
0.06
0.03
0.01
<0.01
0.04
0.03
0.01
0.02
lclt>J.<
All
Ni
0.13
0.06
0.02
0.11
0.15
0.04
0.14
0.11
0.48
0.06
0.11
0.16
0.27
0.09
0.05
0.20
0.02
0.05
i / . iij.utrj.ai.fc; leau r\.et>u.
Values in mg/Jl Except pH
Pb Zn PCB
<0.04
2.00
<0.04
<0.04
0.50
0.08
0.31
0.48
0.47
0.06
0.21
0.58
0.45
0.29
0.65
0.24
0.80
0.37
0.02
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.22
0.05
0.08
0.06
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.07
0.30
0.01
0.11
<0.01
—
<0.01
—
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
—
<0.01
—
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
—
<0.01
<0.01
LUS
As £
<0.1 7
	 ~j
<0.1 7
— 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 6
<0.1 7
— 7
<0.1 6
— 6
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
<0.1 7
— 7
<0.1 8
<0.1 7
H
.8
.7
.1
.1
.1
.9
.5
.2
.9
.8
.1
.1
.9
.9
.7
.2
.1
.3
DO
8.1
8.0
0.8
2.8
6.8
0.6
1.7
0.4
0.6
3.0
2.6
1.0
5.2
9.4
1.8
0.4
9.2
—
Shake
_p_H DO
— —
— —
— —
— —
7.1 7.6
6.9 3.6
— —
— —
— —
— —
6.8 2.8
7.0 1.6
7.5 4.8
7.3 8.4
— —
— —
7.6 8.8
— —
(Site Water)

-------
     In summary, the water analyses shewed organic and toxic pollutants to
be present in the water column, indicating a potential hazard to aquatic
biota and causing dissolved oxygen depletion.

          b.  Bulk Sediment Analyses

     Considerable scientific debate has taken place in recent years over
the value of bulk sediment chemical analyses for assessing the probable
environmental impacts of dredging and dredged material disposal.  It has
been argued and demonstrated (12,13) that bulk sediment analyses are a
poor predictive tool for evaluating release of pollutants to the water
during dredging or disposal.  Elutriate tests are generally favored by
most investigators for such evaluations.  However, a focus on short-tern
release to the water does not address the issue of in-place pollutants.
Bulk sediment chemistry is the most appropriate and convenient way to
describe sediment properties and to relate them to organisms present and
to sedimert bioassay data.  The elutriate test in this context is a
useful but secondary method of sediment characterization.

     The Great Lakes Surveillance Branch of Region V,  EPA, hfs developed a
classification system for sediment quality based primarily on bulk analyses
(14).  This system has been defended by Bowden on very appropriate grounds
(15):

            "The bulk sediment approach has been widely criticized
          as not being scientifically sound.   We acknowledge that
          there may be some merit to these criticisms, but we adhere
          to the system for the following three reasons:

             1.   No suitable alternative system has been developed.

             2.   The fundamental assumption that adverse impact
                 on the environment is related to degree of
                 anthropogenic contamination has not been re-
                 futed and is probably sound.

             3.   The critics do not appear to understand how the
                 guidelines are applied.  The criticism is based
                 on attempts to find correlations between indivi-
                 dual parameters and toxicity or releases to the
                 water column.   In no case have we seen any author
                 evaluate bulk sediment data as an overall family
                 of data rather than as individual parameters.
                 Thus far, our overall classifications agree
                 remarkably well with bioassays using  organisms
                 indigenous to the lakes..."

     With this background, bulk sediment properties shown in Table 6 can
be discussed.   The  discussion begins in general terms  to identify zones
of highest contamination then proceeds to a more specific description of
noteworthy stations.
                                     28

-------
                (1) Percent Solids and Particle Size.  In general, higher
 percent solids and larger proportions of sand relative to silt and clay
 were observed at tue lakeward stations and at stations upstream of the
 E Street Bridge.   The intermediate stations between stations 5A and 12A
 produced fine-grained sediments with high water content.   The fine-grained
 sediments tended to be more polluted, as the following discussions show.

                (2)  Organic Pollutants.   Percent volatile solids,  Immediate
 Oxygen Demand, and TKN (Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen) are indicators of organic
 matter in sediments.   The Immediate Oxygen Demand (IOD)  test (see Appendix
 B for specification)  is an indirect method of assessing  organic deposition.
 It is a simple yet effective measure of  the oxygen consuming potential of  a
 sediment that is  mixed with water.   The  reduced iron,  manganese,  and  sulfide
 species responsible for this oxygen consumption are associated with low Eh
 (redox potential)  caused by anaerobic decomposition of organic matter in the
 sediments.   All three of these parameters (volatile solids,  TKN,  and  IOD)
 were found  to indicate the highest  degree of organic pollution between
 Turning Basin No.  1 and the E Street Bridge.   Most of  the stations within
 this reach  had values of these parameters many times higher  than  stations
 farther upstream  or downstream.   Organic contamination such  as this could
 occur because of  natural conditions (settling of detritus) or  from the
 historic discharges of  wastewater and urban stormwater to Trail Creek.
 Because detritus  such as leaf litter was observed in very few  sediment
 samples,  it  is not likely that the  organic sediment components are primarily
 natural.

                (3)  Oil  and  Grease.   At  most  stations  between  Turning  Basin
 No.  1 and the E Street  Bridge,  oil  was clearly  detectable in the sediments
 by sight and  smell.   The act  of  taking sediment  samples often  caused  an oily
 sheen to appear on  the water  surface.  These  observations  are  corroborated
 by the  data in Table  6,  showing  elevated concentrations of oil and  grease
 between Stations 4A and  11.

      The most  severe  oil  and  grease  contamination was  found at Stations
 7, 8A,  8B, 8C, and  11.   These  stations all are near marinas,  indicating
 the  effects of power boat activities.  Engine maintenance at  the marinas
 may  be  a source of  oily materials, possibly through accidental spills and
 runoff  of oily soil and storage yard debris during storms.

               (4)  PCB.  Polychlorinated biphenyl distribution in Trail
 Creek sediments is  scattered; although the highest concentrations occur
 in the  same reach as the highest concentrations of other pollutants, some
 stations in this reach (e.g. 8B and 8E) produced samples with PCB below
 detection limits.   Review of Table 6 and Figures 2 and 5 shows that most
 of the higher values occurred between the railroad bridge  and Turning
Basin No. 1.  The presence of any PCB is undesirable, but the concentrations
found are not unusually high for an urban area (1).
                                     29

-------
                (5)   Arsenic.   The pollutant most influential in the
 inclusion of Michigan City as a Priority 1 location in the first report
 on Section 115 was  arsenic.   Data available at the time of that report
 showed arsenic concentrations in the thousands of mg/kg dry weight.  This
 study found a maximum arsenic concentration of 21.7 mg/kg dry weight.  It
 is interesting to note that most stations for which more than one core
 depth interval was  analyzed for arsenic  showed more arsenic in the deeper
 sediment  than on the surface  (Table 6).   This trend may indicate that
 the source of arsenic is diminishing or  has ceased.   (One possibility is
 aerially  transported fly ash,  reduced in recent years  by air pollution
 control equipment at the NIPSCO station).   No other pollutants showed
 kind of trend with  depth intervals in the sediment cores.

                (6)   Other Heavy Metals.   All the other heavy metals
 investigated showed the  same  tendency toward relatively high concentra-
 tions between Turning Basin No.  1 and the E Street Bridge.   The
 concentrations in this reach  of Trail Creek are typical of  heavily polluted
 urban waterways  in  the U.S.   The levels  of cadmium and zinc in Table  6
 are seen  by  a review of  the data in the  first Section  115 report to be
 among the highest in the country (1).

      A review of  all stations  for which more than  one  core  depth interval
 was analyzed (Stations 4A, 6,  7,  8C,  11,  and 12A)  does not  indicate
 consistent trends of heavy metals with depth.   With  the possible exception
 of  arsenic,  pollutant concentrations  did  not vary  consistently with depth
 in  the  cores.  Thus,  throughout  the history of  deposition of  polluted
 sediments, little change appears  to have  taken  place.

           c.   Elutriate  Te_sts_

      Laboratory tests  were performed  to assess  the short-term availability
 of  in-place  pollutants to  the water when  intimately mixed with the  water
 as  would  occur during  hydraulic dredging,  open-water disposal of dredged
materials, or  other  turbulent mixing  event.   Test methods are given in
Appendix  B.    Briefly, elutriate  tests involve  shaking  sediments with clean
water,  settling and  filtering the water,  and  analysis  of the  filtrate.  The
 results,  shown in Table  7, yield  the  following  brief interpretations.

               (1)  Ammonia.  The NH3 - NH4+  species were released  to
 the aquatic  phase in  large amounts by the  sediments from the  polluted
reach between Turning Basin No. 1 and the E  Street Bridge.  The  greatest
releases were from Stations 5A and  7  (Table  7).  These  stations  both
had high values of TKN in  the bulk  analyses  (Table 6),   so the release  of
ammonia nitrogen from  these samples in the elutriate test is not  surprising.

               (2)  Heavy Metals.  Release of heavy metals was inconsistent,
as a review of Table 7 shows.   Often the elutriate contained lower metal
concentrations than site water (for example, Zn at most stations).  This
type of behavior is  often observed in the elutriate test, and is generally
attributed to adsorption of metal ions to clay particles.
                                    30

-------
               (3)  PCB.  Detectable levels of PCB were not released in
any elutriate tests.

               (4)  Aeration vs. Shaking.  Agitation for the elutriate
tests was provided by two means for some stations, to determine whether
aeration rather than mechanical shaking produced consistently different
results.  The two procedures used to suspend the sediments did not
reveal consistent trends with regard to any tendency for either proce-
dure to release more or less pollutant to the aquatic phase.  For
example, Table 8 compares the two agitation methods for Stations 7 and
13D.

           Table 8.  Comparison of Aerated vs. Mechanically
                Shaken Elutriate Tests for Two Stations
Station     Agitation Method that Resulted in Higher Levels of Each Parameter

            m3~®       Cd      Cu        Ni      Pb       Zn       £H    Do

  7       A (Aeration)  AS         A       A        S        AS

 13D      S (Shake)     A       A         S       A        S        A     A
     As an earlier discussion noted, elutriate tests are not of primary
importance in assessing in-place pollutants, but do have potential use for
assessing dredging and disposal options.  Because the focus here is on
in-place pollutants, the elutriate test results do not weigh heavily in
the following summary of sediment testing.

          d.   Summary of Physical and Chemical Analyses

     The preceding discussion reveals general patterns of water and sedi-
ment characteristics.  More specific trends will now be described, forming
the rationale for selection of stations to be investigated through bioassays
and benthos studies.

     Themost important inference that can be gained from reviewing the
data is that Trail Creek and Michigan City Harbor are not characterized by
intense, localized "hot spots."  Rather, the entire reach from Turning Basin
No. 1 to the wastewater treatment plant exhibits a fairly uniform bottom type
with regard to in-place pollutants.  Upstream and lakeward of this reach are
areas much less affected by anthropogenic sediment contaminants.

     Despite the absence of intense "hot spots", several stations within the
polluted reach of Trail Creek are anomalously low in one or more pollutants.
Stations 8B and 8E, for example, did not contain detectable quantities of
PCB.  Similarly, some stations were low in arsenic relative to surrounding
stations.  No correlations were apparent between these observations and sta-
tion location or other sediment parameters.
                                     31

-------
      Because the stations within the polluted  reach were  fairly uniform  in
 physical and chemical  characteristics,  it was  not necessary  to use  any com-
 plex indexing schemes  for selecting  priority stations  for biological  studies.
 A simple rank-ordering was performed for the stations  with highest  concen-
 trations of pollutants in surficial  sediments.  This rank-ordering  (Table 9),
 while providing a convenient  summary of relative sediment pollution,  was a
 further indication that in-place pollutants are widespread rather than con-
 fined to ':hot spots".

      The following\ stations were selected for  analysis of  benthos:

           Station 4A,  with the highest PCB content but relatively
           low values of other pollutants except arsenic and TKN.

           Stations 6,  7,  and  8B,  representing  the most contaminated
           stations (most  pollutants  ranked in  Table 9).   Station
           8B  was  of particular interest because of a PCB  concentra-
           tion below the  detection limit.

           Station 11,  which showed high burdens of heavy metals and
           oil and grease,  in comparison with neighboring upstream
           stations.

           Station 13D,  a  relatively  "clean" station downstream of
           the wastewater  treatment plant outfall and upstream of the
           Federally authorized navigation channel.

      The particularly  interesting stations in  the above group:  4A,  8E and
 11, were selected for  bioassays, together with Station 1,  a relatively un-
 contaminated  area at the mouth of the harbor which served as a control.

 C.    INVESTIGATION OF  BENTHIC ASSEMBLAGES

      These  investigations were conducted by Dr. Thomas McComish and  his
 students at the Department of Biology, Ball State  University, Muncie,
 Indiana.

      1.   Methods and Materials

      In the laboratory, all macrobenthos were separated from debris  in each
 sample by hand.  The procedure involved placing a  small amount of  the  sample
 in a  90 mm diameter gridded petri desh,  adding  water  and slowly searching
 through all debris.  After sight recognition,  each  organism was removed
with  a forceps, counted and sorted into an  appropriate vial with  about 10
 percent formalin as a preservative.

     The identification procedure varied according  to  the  group involved.
 Chironomids were first examined wet  using a  dissecting  microscope  at 12.5
 to SOX.  Then each head capsule was  removed  and mounted on a microscope
 slide in polyvinyl lactophenol and a cover was  added.   Head capsules were
examined at 100 to 400X using a compound microscope.   Chironomids  were
                                     32

-------
Table 9.  Rank-ordering of Stations by Concentration of Each Parameter Measured




Parameter
Rank (e.g. 1 =
Blank =

Station
2
3c
4a
5a
5b
5c
6
7
8a
8b
8c
8d
8e
9a
9b
10
11
12a
12b
13b
Volatile
Solid



4

7
IT
IT
8
5

6
3








IOD

8

2
7
3
1


5

6
4








TKN


3
4


1
2
6
5
7





8



Oil &
Grease




8
7
5
2
6
1
3T





3T




PCB

8
1
4
6

7
5


3
2









As
5

4
1



7
2
3
6





8



Highest concentration of all stations.
Not among 8 stations most
in that pollutant)

Cd



3
8

1 2
4

5


7
2


6




Cu


8
6


1
5
7
1
3





4




Ni



2


7T
4
5
6

8

3



7


concentrated

Pb






4
7T
3
4
2

1
6


5




Zn



7



5
8
2
3


6







-------
 identified only to genus with the aid of appropriate keys but primarily
 Mason (16).  Other arthropods, molluscs and leeches were identified from
 wet mounts using the dissecting microscope noted above and suitable
 taxonomic keys.

      Oligochaetes were extremely numerous in samples necessitating sub-
 sampling for specimens to identify.   The procedure was to place all of the
 worms from a sample onto a tray (25  x 40 cm) gridded into 1000 numbered
 square centimeters.  Care was taken  to spread the specimens evenly over
 the tray.   Next a table of random numbers was used to select a specific
 numbered square centimeter from the  tray.  All worms were removed from
 the centimeter and enumerated.   Additional square centimeters in the grid
 were selected using this procedure until about 100 intact specimens were
 accumulated for a sample.   Then the  worms for each subsample were mounted
 in CMC-10  (Turtox), a non-resinous mounting medium with clearing agent
 and a cover slip was added.   Specimens were identified to species when
 possible using suitable taxonomic keys,  but mainly Hiltunen (17), and a
 compound microscope at 100 to 1000X.   Peloscolex multisetosus multisetosus.
 P..  m.  longidentus and Limnodrilus udekemiames were identified in all life
 stages (mature and  immature).   The remaining species (see Table 10) were
 only identifiable as adults.   Immature tubificids which were not identi-
 fiable were listed  only as with or without capilliform chaetae.

      2.   Results and Discussion

     Oligochaetes dominated the bottom fauna on a numerical  (Table 10)
 and percent composition (Table  11) basis.   The number  per ponar  grab
 ranged from over  10,000 at station 8b  to  about 400 at  station 7  with a
 mean for all  stations of about  3,000.  Large numbers of  Oligochaetes
 relative to other benthic  organisms is clearly shown by  percent  composi-
 tion which  ranged from 96.9 at  station  7  to 100.0 at station  8b.

     The oligochaete  fauna was dominated  by Limnodrilus  spiralis.  L.
 hoffmeisteri. and Tubifex  tubifex  at most  stations.  The  population level
 of 1.  tubifex was particularly high (8,900  per  grab, or  an estimated
 185,000 per mz) at  station 8b and  the average  for  all stations was over
 1,800  per grab.  J\  tubifex was, however, absent  at station 13d.   L_.
 spiralis and L. hoffmeisteri population levels were generally lower" than
 . tubifex.   The maximum and average numbers  for  these two species  respec-
 tively were 1500  (estimated 31,000 per mz)  and  640, and 400  (estimated
 8,000 per m2) and 190.

     A single species of carnivorous midge, Procladius sp_. dominated the
 chironomid  fauna  (Table 10).  It was present at all stations but  in very
 low numbers  (1 to 11, mean of 6).  The three genera of midges in  samples
 comprised only from 0.1 to 2.5 percent abundance at stations.

     Other taxa represented included:  a single mayfly specimen  (Hexagenia
 limbata) which was probably a transient carried by currents from elsewhere,
a single gammarid (Crangonyx gracilis). a single crayfish, individual
specimens of two leeches (Helobdella  stagnalis. and Dina sp.), and sphaerid
clams  (Pisidium sp.) in very low numbers  (2 to 4 per grab).
                                    34

-------
             Table 10.  Macrobenthic organisms in Ponar grab samples collected  at  stations in
                        the Trail Creek Study Area, Michigan City, Indiana  in April,  1977
LO
Ul
Taxa
Annelida
Oligochaeta
Tubificidae
Ilyodrilus templetoni
Limnodrilus cervix
Limnodrilus claparedeianus
Limnodrilus hof fmeisteri
Limnodrilus spiralis
Limnodrilus udekemianus
Peloscolex multisetosus
longidentus
Peloscolex multisetosus
multisetosus
Tub if ex tub if ex
Unidentifiable immature
With capilliform chaetae
Without capilliform chaetae
Hirudinea
Glossiphoniidae
Helobdella stagnalis
Erpobdellidae
Dina sp.
Number per Grab at Station
4a
2142
2142
2142
45
156
89
381
66
135
111
446
713
334
379
—
—
__
—
6
2237
2237
2237
25
25
402
327
76
125
25
577
655
378
277
—
—
__
—
7
443
432
432
6
6
153
179
60
11
17
6
11
1
1
1
—
8b
10416
10415
10415
—
115
469
8904
927
698
229
1
—
1
1
11
5702
5702
5702
—
108
51
1290
108
376
1129
2640
1237
1403
—
—
—
—
13d
2737
2737
2737
—
57
1526
27
1070
85
985
—
—
—
—

-------
                                            Table 10  (Continued)
U)
Taxa
Arthropoda
Crustacea
Amphipoda
Gammaridae
Crangonyx gracilis
Decapoda
Unidentifiable
Insecta
Ephemeroptera
Ephemeridae
Hexagenia limbata
Diptera
Chironomidae
Tanypodinae
Procladius sp.
Psectrotanypus sp.
Alabesmyia sp.
Unidentifiable
Chironominae
Chionomus sp.
Mollusca
Pelecypoda
Sphaeridae
Pisidium sp.
Number per Grab at Station
4a
1
—
—
—

—
—
1
—
—
—
1
1
1
1
—
—
—
—
__
4
4
4
4
6
7
—
—
—

—
—
7
—
—
__
7
7
7
7
—
—
—
—
....
2
2
2
2
7 8b 11
13 5 3
2 	 	
1
1
i _
_L ™-^
1
1
11 5 3
—
—
	 _ 	 	 	
11 5 3
11 5 3
11 5 3
952
i _ _
JL "•
1
1
—
»— «_ ___
— — — „
—
— — —
— _.. __
13d
13
—
—
—

__
—
13
1
1
1
12
12
12
11

—
—
1
1

—
—
__

-------
      Table 11.  Percent composition and total taxa for macrobenthic
 organisms in Ponar grab samples collected at stations in the Trail Creek
             Study Area, Michigan City, Indiana in April, 1977
Taxa
^
Annelida
Oligochaeta
Hirudinea
Arthropoda
Crustacea
Insecta
Ephemeroptera
Diptera
Mollusca
Pelecypoda
Total Taxa**
Station
4a
99.8
99.8
—
T*
—
T
—
T
0.2
0.2
10
6
99.6
99.6
—
0.3
—
0.3
—
0.3
0.1
0.1
10
7
97.1
96.9
0.2
2.9
0.4
2.5
—
2.5
—
—
11
8b
100.0
100.0
T
T
—
T
—
T
—
—
5
11
99.9
99.9
—
0.1
—
0.1
— _
0.1
__
—
8
13d
99.5
99.5
__
0.5
__
0.5
T
0.5
__
—
7
*T = Trace; less than 0.1%

** Number of different taxa classified at least to genus,
                                    37

-------
     Diversity at all stations was very low.  The total taxa, which
included organisms identified at least to genus, ranged from 5 to 11  (Table
11).  Diversity of organisms was highest (10 to 11) at downstream stations
4a, 6, and 7 and lowest  (5 to 8) at upstream stations 8b, 11, and 13d.
These data tend to show  slightly improved environmental conditions at
downstream stations, probably because of the dilution effect of lake water
entering the creek during reverse flow.  This dilution apparently outweighs
the fact that in-place pollutants were generally more concentrated at the
downstream stations.  In general, however, the biota show severe limitation
in diversity at all stations.

     The low diversity together with high numbers of oligochaetes and the
indicator species predominating indicate conditions of high organic enrich-
ment at all stations.  Brinkhurst (18) presents data for European rivers
with "bad" organic pollution.  Tubificids which were population dominants
for this degree of pollution Included T_. tubifex, L. hoffmeisteri and L.
udekemianus.  These species, together or in part, were major components of
the oligochaete communities at stations sampled in Trail Creek.  Brinkhurst
also points out that I_.  tubifex and 11. hoffmeisteri "are the most resistant
(oligochaetes) to organic and inert mineral pollution in Britain".

     Additional evidence for conditions of poor water quality and environ-
mental conditions (e.g. substrate components) is the few oligochaete species
at stations.  Downstream stations 4a, 6, and 7 had from 6 to 8 oligochaete
species present while more upstream stations had only 3 to 6 oligochaete
species.  Further, the only crustaceans (Crangonyx gracilus and an unidenti-
fiable crayfish) and molluscs (Pisidium sp.) sampled were at the downstream
stations.  These data support the possibility of slightly improved down-
stream conditions probably because of dilution with cleaner Lake Michigan
water.  Brinkhurst (18) points out that as environmental conditions im-
prove toward "normal", more oligochaete species are found.  Such was the
case for Trail Creek downstream compared to upstream stations.  It should
be emphasized, however, that all stations indicate "bad" to "gross" pollu-
tion as defined by Brinkhurst (18) for stream conditions.

     Relationships between thes.e findings and the physical-chemical data
are investigated in the next section of the report (Section VI).

D.   SEDIMENT BIOASSAYS

     These studies were performed by the University of Michigan Biological
Station at Pellston.  Because the description of methods and materials is
quite detailed,  it appears in Appendix C.

     1.   Introduction

     The purpose of this investigation was to design and conduct acute
static bioassays to determine the effects of Michigan City Harbor sediments
on biota.  Although laboratory bioassay procedures for waterborne toxicants
are well-established (19,20) only a few sediment bioassays have been con-
ducted (21,22,23).  Because of the dynamic nature of chemical equilibria
                                    38

-------
 at the sediment-water interface (24) ,  laboratory test conditions should be
 maintained as  closely as possible to  those in the field.

      Organisms indigenous to Lake Michigan which were readily adaptable
 to laboratory  conditions were selected for the tests.   Four species were
 included,  representing different trophic levels and habitats:   Pontoporeia
 affinis  Lindstrom,  Cyclops bicuspidatus thomasi Forbes,  Daphnia galeata
 mendotae Birge,  and Salmo gairdneri Richardson.   The amphipod Pontoporeia
 affinis  was selected because it is a  sensitive indicator  of polluted con-
 ditions  and is an  abundant species in the benthos of Lake Michigan offshore
 waters (22).   The  co^epod Cyclops bicuspidatus thomasi was chosen because
 it is the most abundant crustacean plankter in Lake Michigan (25) and is
 often most prevalent near the sediment-water interface (25).   The cladoceran
 Daphnia  galeata meruiotae was selected  because Daphnia have frequently been
 used  as  freshwater  test organisms in  laboratory bioassay  and comparative
 literature is  readily available (19).   This planktonic species is common
 throughout Lake Michigan (26).   Salmo  gairdneri (rainbow  trout)  was chosen
 as the fourth  species because it is commonly stocked in nearshore waters
 of Lake  Michigan and is widely used in bioassay tests.

      2.    Overview  of: Methods

      Although  detailed procedures are  given in Appendix C,  the general
 methods  are described here for the reader seeking a less  thorough descrip-
 tion.

      Two  types  of tests were performed:   a  sediment preference test with
 Pontoporeia, and toxicity tests with all four organisms.   The  sediment
 preference test  involved the following major steps:

           Place  sediments from 27  stations  in small containers,  onen
           at top

           Place  containers  on the  bottom of  a large aquarium filled
           with  clean water

           Scatter 100 organisms  evenly over  the water  surface

           Tabulate  live  and  dead  individuals  in each container after
           48 hours.

 Because Pontoporeia  prefers  clean  sediments,  the  number of  individuals
 selecting  a sediment  in  this  type  of test provides  some insight  regarding
 the relative suitability  of  each  station  to  support  "desirable"  benthic
 life.

      Static bioassays were conducted in  apparatus containing sediment  from
 a  sampling  station, with  clean  lake water over the  sediment.  Very  little
work has been reported  in the literature on  solid phase bioassays of this
 type.  A manual discussing bioassays of dredged materials has recently
been published by EPA and the Corps of Engineers  (27), and  the solid phase
                                     39

-------
bioassays described there have no variance of water .-sediment ratios.
The criterion for assessing the dredged material is a comparison of per-
cent mortalities observed with dredged material to mortalities observed
with a clean control sediment.  Prater and Anderson (23) used a similar
approach.

     Such a selection of a single water:sediment ratio provides little
opportunity for quantitative assessments (e.g. LC50 computations).  There-
fore, a range of water:sediment ratios was used in this work for each
station and for each organism tested.  In accordance with standard prac-
tice, the same size aquaria were used for all sediment bioassays with each
species.  Therefore, sediment area was constant and equal to the plan
area of the aquarium used for each species.  "Concentration" was varied
by varying the volume of water over the sediment.  The controlled variable
in these tests was therefore not the suspected toxicant, but the diluent
water.  Therefore, the ratio
                              volume of water
                         surface area of sediment
is used to derive inferences regarding the toxicity of each sediment.

     No literature has been found on such sediment bioassays with variable
"concentration."  The use of the above ratio therefore has no precedent;
it was used simply to be consistent with standard bioassay practice wherein
the controlled variable (normally an added toxicant, but in this case
the dilution water) is the numerator in the expression for "concentration."
As a result of the use of this type of ratio, and in contrast to conven-
tional bioassays, higher LC50 values indicate higher toxicity.

     3.   Results and Discussion

          a.   Sediment Preference Test

     Duplicate tests were run, referred to here as Trial One and Trial
Two.  Upon termination of Trial One, 67 individuals had selected sedi-
ments, with 42% found in the open-lake sediments from Station 1, and the
remainder scattered in 9 of the Harbor sediments.  Upon termination of
Trial Two, 79 individuals were present in the sediments, with 54% occur-
ring in the open-lake sediments and the remainder found in 15 of the Harbor
sediments (Table 12).

     The sediment preference test can be useful in determining whether
land or water disposal is more suitable for harbor dredgings because altera-
tion of the substrate and introduction of toxic substances at the disposal
site are probably the primary factors which cause adverse effects on the
benthos.  The test is of less direct use to this study of in-place pollutants,
because the physical character of sediments is important in the preference of
mobile organisms.  That is, even unpolluted harbor sediments may be avoided
by Pontoporeia simply because they are too fine-grained.  The primary appli-
cations of the test to this study are two:
                                     40

-------
      Table 12.   Results of Sediment Preference Tests with Pontoporeia

Station No.
1
1
1
1
1
1
Totals
2
3a
3b
3c*
4a
4b
4c
5a
5b*
5c
6
7
8a*
8b*
8c
8d
8e
9 *
9b*
10
11 *
12a*
12b
13b
13c
13d*
Totals
Trial
Live
7
8
1
0
6
2
24
3
7
0
0
4
2
0
0
0
1
0
3
0
0
0
1
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
0
0
36
One
Dead
0
1
1
0
1
1
4
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
Trial
Live
2
7
5
3
7
15
39
3
4
0
0
0
1
4
1
0
1
4
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
2
5
0
30
Two
Dead
0
2
1
0
0
0
3
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
7
*Sediments which did not contain any Pontoporeia after either trial.
                                    41

-------
          As a simple estimator for overall substrate suitability

          As a quick and approximate guide to toxicity of a large
          number of sediment samples.
     Tests with Michigan City Harbor sediments indicated that Pontoporeia
displayed greatest preference for open-lake sediments.  Those Harbor
sediments selected by Pontoporeia did not appear to adversely affect
this species, since mortality was low or absent in the preference tests.

     Gannon and Beeton (22) conducted similar sediment preference tests
on sediments from harbors of Lakes Michigan, Erie, and Ontario and observed
that Pontoporeia preferred those sediments with the highest proportion of
sand, lowest chemical oxygen demand, and lowest amounts of volatile solids,
phosphate-phosphorus, and ammonia-nitrogen.  They suggested that Pontoporeia
may be especially sensitive to petroleum hydrocarbons since dead amphipods
were usually covered with oil.  However, other potential toxicants such as
heavy metals, chlorinated hydrocarbons, or pesticides may be causative
factors.  These potential relationships are explored in Section VI, where
bioassay data are related to sediment analyses.

          b.   Bioassays

     The three test sediments displayed the same increasing order of
toxicity (4a-ll-8b) in all bioassays (Tables 13-15).  Extending the
duration of assays with Pontoporeia and Daphnia from 48 to 96 hours resulted
in a slight increase in mortality although the slope function remained
nearly the same.  Mortality at maximum test concentrations employed averaged
25.7% for Station 4a sediments, 53.3% for Station 11, and 97.2% for Station
8b (Tables 13-15).

     Mortality was sufficiently high in Station 8b sediments to calculate
LC 50 values with all test organisms.  Based on LC 50 values, Salmo were
most sensitive to 8b sediments, followed by Daphnia, Pontoporeia, and
Cyclops.

     Sediments from Station 11 were less toxic than 8b sediments.  Mortality
was sufficiently high in the 96-hour assays with Daphnia and both 48 and
96-hour assays with Pontoporeia to calculate LC50 values.  In remaining
tests with this sediment, LC 50 values were estimated by extrapolation.
Salmo was most sensitive to Station 11 sediments, followed by Pontoporeia,
Daphnia and Cyclops.

     Sediments from Station 4a were least toxic.   The LC 50 values were
estimated by extrapolation for all test organisms.  Salmo was least sensitive
to sediments from Station 4a, with no mortality occurring in any of the test
concentrations.  Cyclops were most sensitive, followed by Pontoporeia and
Daphnia.

     Behavior of the organisms under test conditions frequently indicated
physiological stress.  Pontoporeia tended to burrow immediately when
                                     42

-------
 Table 13.   Summarized Data for Sediment Bioassays with Pontoporeia affinis
Station
Maximum
Percent
Mortality
LC50
(liters/in2)
Slope
Function
 48-hour  Bioassay

    4a

    8b

   11


 96-hour  Bioassay

    4a

    8b

   11
 31

100

 72
 37

100

 96
 6.2* (8.5-4.5)+

20.5  (23.0-18.2)

17.0§ (17.2-16.1)
 8.6* (11.5-6.4)

23.5  (27.0-20.4)

96.0§ (20.1-18.0)
0.46

0.71
0.37

0.71
*Extrapolated value from concentrations less than the LC 50
+Lower and upper 95% confidence limits.
§Estimated LC50 determined by the moving average-angle method of Harris  (28)
                                    43

-------
             Table 14.   Summarized  Data for Sediment Bioassays
                        with Daphnia galeata mendotae
 Station
 Maximum
 Percent
Mortality
      LC50
    (liters/m2)
 Slope
Function
48-hour Bioassays

  4a

  8b

 11


96-hour Bioassays

  4a

  8b

 11
   28

  100

   35
   40

  100

   69
 2.7* (5.6-1.3)+

30.3§ (35.2-25.4)

 8.6* (13.6-5.4)
 6.6* (11.0-4.0)

41.2§ (45.2-37.2)

13.3§ (15.1-12.0)
  0.13
  0.40
  0.17
*Extrapolated value from concentrations less than the LC 50.
+Lower and upper 95% confidence limits.
§Estimated LC50 determined by the moving average-angle method of Harris  (28)
                                     44

-------
            Table 15.  Summarized Data for 48-hour Sediment
    Bioassays with Cyclops bicuspidatus thomasi and Salmo gairdneri
Station
 Maximum
 Percent
Mortality
Cyclops bicuspidatus thomasi
  4a

  8b

 11


Salmo gairdneri

  4a

  8b

 11
    18

   100

    18
     0

    83

    30
      LC50
   (Iiters/m2)
 6.7* (8.6-5.2)+

17.5  (20.3-15.1)

 8.1* (11.6-5.7)
94.5  (111.2-80.3)

44.5* (58.6-33.8)
 Slope
Function
  0.61

  0.59

  0.49
  0.64

  0.58
*Extrapolated value from concentrations less than the LC 50

+Lower and upper 95% confidence limits.
                                    45

-------
 introduced into the test vessels but generally left the sediments when
 physiologically stressed.   Dead individuals were found lying on the sedi-
 ment surface.   Daphnia rarely experienced  entrapment in the surface film
 at the air-water interface while in culture or during test  conditions
 with open-lake sediments,  but entrapment occurred frequently under toxic
 test conditions.   This apparently resulted from erratic swimming behavior
 elicited by physiological  stress.   Behavioral  indications of stress in
 Cvcl°Ps could  not be observed because of their very small size  and burrow-
 ing  nature.  Active movements of Salmo kept the sediments agitated   This
 sediment disruption resulted  in such a high turbidity level with sediments
 8b and  11 that individuals could be observed only when near the surface
 ll ?^t0<  !at^  s'ressed individuals were  present near the  surface,  whereas
 healthy individuals  were primarily  near bottom.

      It  is  quite  likely that  suspended sediments  were  a significant  factor
    u          f°r Salmo' especially in view of the fact that Station 4a
which did not have high turbidity in the Salmo tests, produced no mortali-
ties.  Tests with Stations 1 and 4a for Salmo. and for all stations with
the other three organisms, were characterized by consistently clear water.

     Sediments 4a and 11 were considerably less toxic than 8b sediments.
The relatively low mortalities do not appear to be artifacts resulting
from experimental design.  Bioassays could not be run at any higher concen
trations than were actually employed, since this would have resulted in
water volumes being inadequate for maintenance of organisms.

     The results of the physical,  chemical and biological investigations
are interrelated in Section VI.
                                    46

-------
                  VI:  INTERPRETATION:  CHARACTERIZATION OF
                       ZONES WITHIN THE CREEK AND HARBOR

      Having described in an objective and quantitative way the charac-
 teristics and effects of Trail Creek sediments, this report must interpret
 those findings.  This interpretation is needed to define areas or zones
 with certain sets of characteristics so that priorities can be assigned
 for any recommended action.

 A.   RELATIONSHIPS AMONG BIOLOGICAL AND PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL DATA

      1.   Macrobenthos Investigation

      The results of the detailed studies of macrobenthos,  presented in
 Section V,  showed that even at stations that were relatively "clean" from
 a chemical standpoint, the benthic assemblages indicated severe organic
 pollution.   Annelida comprised more than 97% of the organisms at all six
 stations selected for detailed study (Table 10),  and the total taxa ranged
 from 5 to 11.   Little difference was noted between stations,  although
 conditions  at  the downstream stations appeared to show slightly improved
 conditions  relative to the upstream stations.

      Chemically,  there is  no apparent corresponding evidence  that the
 three downstream stations  (4A,  6,  and 7)  were  any lower in in-place
 pollutants  than the three  upstream stations (8B,  11,  and 13D).   Two
 possible interpretations may be made:

          a)    Benthic environments in the entire reach between
                stations 4A and  13D are so polluted that none  of the
                benthic assemblages is  significantly "healthier" than
                any  other.   OR,

          b)    The  downstream benthic  assemblages  are,  in  fact,
                slightly less  improverished than those upstream.
                The  dilution by  lake water,  enhanced by  the  seiche
                effect, permits  a slightly  more diverse  benthic
                community to exist.

     Formal resolution of  this  question is not possible with the  data
available, and  it is probably not  a worthwhile goal.  It is clear that
the entire reach from Station 4A to Station 13D (at least) is charac-
terized by a poor benthic  habitat, and fine gradations within this
reach have little significance.  A clearer distinction among stations
was provided by the bioassay data.

     2.   Bioassays

     The approach used to interpret bioassay data in view of sediment
quality has been simply to plot LC50 vs. concentration of in-place pollu-
tants.  From this effort,  some possible relationships between sediment
                                    47

-------
 toxicity and pollutant concentrations have appeared.  Several sediment
 contaminants, however, have not been shown by this effort to exert toxicity.
 The most likely reason for not demonstrating the toxicity of known pollu-
 tants in the sediment is that the concentrations of such substances were
 not sufficient to exert independent,  discernible toxic effects in the
 presence of more dangerous concentrations of other substances.  Another
 possibility is that antagonistic effects among sediment contaminants were
 exerted in some samples.  That is,  the presence of one pollutant may have
 decreased the toxicity of another.   Such effects sometimes occur with
 combinations of heavy metals, although synergistic effects are also pos-
 sible among other combinations.

      Some of the correlations between LC50 and pollutant concentration
 are shown in Figures 7 (lead),  8 (cadmium),  9 (percent volatile solids)
 and 10 (oil and grease).  For these parameters,  concentrations and
 toxicities both increase monotonically in the station sequence 1,  4A,
 11,  8B.   (In viewing the graphs,  it is important to note that LC50 is
 expressed in l/mz,  as explained  in  Section V.   Therefore,  in contrast
 to  conventional bioassays,  higher LC50 values indicate higher toxicity.)

      No  one of  the  plots of  Figures 7 through 10 should be taken as proof
 of  a particular substance's  exertion  of toxicity in these  tests.   Many of
 the parameters  are  highly intercorrelated in Michigan City and in other
 waterways.   Therefore,  only  one  or  two of the parameters might be important,
 with the others implicated only  circumstantially because of their correla-
 tion with the causative toxicants.

      One illustration of this possibility is in  Figure 11,  showing an
 "effect"  of  percent  solids similar  to  the trends of  known  pollutants
 shown in Figures  7  through 10.   Lower  percent  solids  would  appear  to
 exert higher  "toxicity"  if this  Figure were  taken out of context.   In
 fact,  low-solids-content sediments  in  urban  areas tend to  consist  of
 large concentrations  of  recently settled  fines,  organics,  and  ferrous
 iron and  manganese oxides, all of which are  likely  to have  high  concen-
 trations  of  sorbed  toxic pollutants.   On  the other hand, it can  be
 argued that  low solids  content could  exert its own  effects  through
 the  ease  by which solids  can  be resuspended  from such fluffy sediments.
 Such may  have been the  case in some Salmo  tests,  but  with  the  other
 organisms  the water remained  clear.

      Despite  the cited uncertainties,  it  can be  stated with some con-
 fidence  that one or more  of the parameters represented by Figures  7
 through 11 were responsible for the observed toxicity, at least  in part.
 This  statement  cannot be made for other investigated  pollutants.   For
 example,  the station with highest PCB  concentration  (4A) produced  rela-
 tively little toxicity while a station with undetectable PCB  (8B)  was
 the most  toxic of those  tested (Figure  12).  Similarly inconsistent
 effects were noted for zinc, arsenic,  TKN, immediate  oxygen demand, and
percent clay.
                                    48

-------
100


 90


 80


 70



 60


 50


 40


 30


 20


 10
Percent
Mortality = 0
        O
        to
        u
        I-J
                     S = Salmo

                     D = Daphnia

                     C = Cyclops

                     p = Pontoporela
                         100   150   200   250   300   350

                              Lead Concentration (mg/kg)
                                                   400
450   500
   475
                Figure 7.  Apparent Effect of Lead Concentration on Toxicity
                                 of Michigan City Sediments
                                               49

-------
          O
          u">
          O
 95

 90




 80



 70



 60



 50



 40



 30



 20



10
  Percent
  Mortality = 0
                       s Salmo
                      •= Average  LC50 for Cyclops
                         Daphnia,  and  Pontoporeia
               0 "    10     20   "  30     40     50    60
                   Cadmium Concentration (mg/kg)
Figure 8.  Apparent Effect of Cadmium Concentration on Toxicity
                   of Michigan City Sediments
                                50

-------
          100
           90
           80
           70
           60
           50
           40
           30
           20
           10

Percent
Mortality = Ol_^
             0
                                                  i      I
S= Salmo
 = Average LC50 for Cyclops,
   Daphnia, and Pontoporeia
           6     8  "  10    12
        Percent Volatile Solids
14    16 17
      Figure 9.  Apparent Effect of Volatile Solids on Toxicity of
                        Michigan City Sediments
                                   51

-------
       CM
            90
            80
            70
            60
            50
            40
            30
           20
           10 _
Percent
Mortality = 0
S = Salmo

•= Average LC50 for Cyclops,
   Daphnia,  and Pontoporeia
             0  S?20"0"0~
           6°     8     10    12"
         Oil and Grease  (mg/kg)
                                                       14 15 16 17  1
   Figure 10.  Apparent Effect of Oil and Grease  Concentration on
                 Toxicity of Michigan City Sediments
                                   52

-------
             CM
             o
             u-1
             CJ
 95
 90


 80


 70


 60


 50


 40


 30


 20


10
                          S= Salmo

                          »z Average LC50 for
                             Cyclops, Daphnia,
                             and Pontoporeia
         70     60     50     40
              Percent Solids
                                                 30
Figure 11.  Apparent Effect of Percent Solids on Toxicity of
               Michigan City Harbor Sediments
                              53

-------
           10  -
 Percent
 Mortality = 0
                        5=:  Salmo
                         =  Average LC50 for
                           Cyclops , Daphnia,
                           and Pontoporela
                   072
074   (J. 6   0.8
  PCB (mg/kg)
2
Figure 12.  Relationship Between PCB Concentration and
        LC50 of Michigan City Harbor Sediments
                           54

-------
 B.   RANKING  OF  ZONES WITHIN  THE  HARBOR

     1.    Criteria

           a.   Biological

     To rank  the zones  in Trail Creek/Michigan City Harbor  on an  environ-
 mental basis, one must  relate  the laboratory investigations conducted  in
 this study to each other and  to the real conditions in  the  area.   Investi-
 gation of  the benthic organisms present appears to be the most direct
 method of  assessment.   However, recent and continuing mitigations  of
 pollutant  discharges to Trail  Creek may be improving the aquatic  system
 faster than the benthic communities can adjust, thereby slightly
 lessening  the validity  of macrobenthic studies.  Bioassays  seem to be  a
 more direct test of the present effects of the sediments, but have some
 degree of deviation from the real world in that:

               Some trout tests involved unrealistically high levels
               of suspended solids because of resuspension by fish
               activity.

               Some organisms  tested,  while being appropriate for
               bioassays in their sensitivity to pollution, may be
               too sensitive for any urban waterway.   In other words,
               other organisms could perhaps form a very desirable
               aquatic  community in Trail Creek but would not yield
               a significant number of mortalities in bioassays of
               the type used in this study.

     Therefore,  to summarize the biological investigations in terms of
criteria,  the following observations are made:

               The environment for macrobenthos appears  undesirable
               at least from Station 4A to  Station 13D.   No criteria
               significantly differentiating "desirable" from "un-
               desirable"  can arise from these  data.

               Toxicity to  a variety of organisms  ranges from nil
               at control  Station  1 to a maximum at Station 8B,  with
               4A and  11 (in that  order)  as  intermediates.   Several
               criteria could  arise  from these  data:

                   A  threshold value  could  be  selected  for LC50,
                   above which all  sediments would be considered
                   "polluted".

                   All  sediments  except  Station 1  could be con-
                   sidered  "polluted" because  some toxicity was
                   observed at those  stations.

                   The  entire  study area could be  considered
                   acceptable,  implying  that the toxicities
                   observed were  not  significant.
                                     55

-------
      In  the  absence  of  a  generally  accepted method  for  assessing  these
 types of biological  data,  it appears  that  the logical criterion should  be
 that  only zero  toxicity should be accepted.  Given  the  uniformly  poor
 quality  of the  macrobenthic community,  the bioassay data  seem  to  provide
 a  level  of differentiation that is  not  significant.
          b.   Chemical

     Prater and Anderson  (23), in their paper on sediment bioassays,
cited bulk analysis criteria developed in EPA Region V for Great Lakes
Harbors  (14).  Some of the pollutants listed in those criteria are
shown in Table 16, with the ranges of conditions observed at Michigan
City.  The last column in Table 16, giving stations located with the
aid of Figure 5, shows most of Trail Creek between the Yacht Basin and
the Wastewater Treatment Plant to be "heavily polluted."

     2.   Rankings

     By two sets of criteria — the Region V chemical criteria and the
macrobenthic evaluations — the entire reach from the wastewater treat-
ment plant downstream to the Yacht Basin is well described as heavily
polluted with respect to bottom sediments.  The bioassay data show some
differences in toxicity within this reach.  Those differences, while
statistically significant (there is very little overlap of the 95%
confidence limits on LC50 from station to station), do not appear im-
portant in the overall context of this study.  That is, while Station
4A's toxicity was low in relation to Stations 8B and 11, the sediments
at Station 4A must be considered poor habitat by any rational criteria.

     Therefore, no rankings of isolated "hot spots" have emerged from
this study.   The surface sediments of Trail Creek and Michigan City
Harbor from the wastewater treatment plant to the Yacht Basin should be
considered a single deposit of several in-place pollutants.  Trail
Creek upstream of the wastewater treatment plant is relatively uncon-
taminated, as is the mouth of the Harbor lakeward of the Yacht Basin
entrance.  The Yacht Basin itself (Station 2) appears to be a unique
zone chemically.   It has several in-place pollutants above the Region
V "Heavily polluted" level,  but appears less contaminated relative to
the upstream areas.  Except for TKN, oil and grease, PCB, and cadmium,
these sediments are similar to those at Station 4A and therefore should
be grouped with the polluted reach.

C.   SOURCES OF IN-PLACE POLLUTANTS

     Trail Creek has a clean,  sandy benthic habitat upstream of a large
landfill and the municipal wastewater treatment plant,  which are in
close proximity to each other.   Downstream of these two obvious sources
of pollutants,  there lies a large, relatively uniform deposit of in-place
pollutants.   Because of the absence of any severe "hot spots" within the
polluted area,  it can be inferred that no important point sources such
as present or historic industrial outfalls are causing problems.
                                     56

-------
                      Table 16.  EPA Region V Bulk Analysis
                Guidelines (14), Compared with Michigan City Data
Parameter
Volatile solids
COD
Total Kjeldahl
Nitrogen
Oil and Grease
Lead
Zinc
Mercury
Ammonia
Cyanide
Phosphorus
Iron
Nickel
Manganese
Arsenic
Cadmium
Chromium
Barium
Copper
Nonpolluted
<5%
<40 000

<1 000
<1 000
<40
<90
<1.0
<75
<0.10
<420
<17 000
<20
<300
<3

<25
<20
<25
Moderately
polluted
5%-8%
40 000-80 000

1 000-2 000
1 000-2 000
40-60
90-200
N.A.
75-200
0.10-0.25
420-650
17 000-25 000
20-50
300-500
3-8

25-75
20-60
25-50
Heavily
polluted
>8%
>80 000

>2 000
>2 000
>60
>200
>1.0
>200
>0.25
>650
>25 000
>50
>500
>8
>6
>75
>60
>50
Reach (Station to Sta-
tion) in Study Area tha
is "Heavily Polluted"
by these Guidelines*
3C -


4A -
2 -
2 -
2 -





2 -

13B


12A
13D
13C
13C





12A

Scattered stations
2 -


13D


Scattered stations
*Some stations within the indicated stream reaches may be below the "Heavily
 polluted" guideline for one or more pollutants, but these few exceptions do
 not seriously reduce the uniformly polluted stream reaches indicated.
                                       57

-------
     Detailed investigations of the wastewater treatment plant and of
the landfill are beyond the scope of this study.  Techniques for identi-
fying sources are limited to inferences based on the location of in-place
pollutants in relation to likely sources.  Because the landfill and the
wastewater treatment plant are in the same area upstream of the in-place
pollutants, their relative impact cannot be determined.  It can be
stated with some confidence that no single source other than these two
is very important, because there is little change in the character of
in-place pollutants throughout the polluted reach.  Pollutants entering
Trail Creek in the landfill/treatment plant area appear to flocculate
and settle to the bottom over a long reach of Trail Creek and Michigan
City Harbor.

     The determination of probable future deposition of in-place
pollutants is contingent on ascertaining the relative effects of the
landfill and the wastewater treatment plant.  Some informed observations
can be made, however.  The wastewater treatment plant has upgraded its
processes and has intensified its surveillance of industrial sewer users
in recent years.  The process upgrading has featured chemical precipi-
tation using alum for phosphate removal, and was installed in 1973.
Before installation of chemical treatment, effluent phosphate concentra-
tions averaged 10 mg/Jl.  Now, effluent phosphate averages less than
0.5 mg/A (29).  The more toxic pollutants described in this project
are not monitored at the treatment plant, but an efficient system of
this type should  enhance removal of a variety of substances, especially
those occurring in suspended or colloidal form and likely to settle out in
the receiving water.  Therefore, the present in-place pollutant deposits
represent a historical discharge that is now improved.   Any landfill
leachate entering Trail Creek probably contains only dissolved pollutants
because particulate matter should be removed by the soil's effect in
filtering leachate.  Many of these substances may become sorbed to
natural stream particulates and possibly suspended solids released by
the nearby treatment plant, so these substances are likely to settle to
the bottom upon reaching the more quiescent downstream areas.  Another
potential means of contamination by the landfill is direct erosion from
rainfall and runoff.  If the landfill should be found by further inves-
tigation to be a major source of in-place pollutants in Trail Creek,
pollution abatement would pose a major problem.  No action to ameliorate
the in-place pollutants should be undertaken before this question of
sources is resolved.
                                    58

-------
            VII.  ASSESSMENT OF POTENTIAL CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

      The previous section showed that the in-place pollutants in the
 sediments of Trail Creek/Michigan City Harbor exert adverse effects on
 the aquatic system.  Several options are available for responding to the
 conditions of polluted sediments in Michigan City Harbor/Trail Creek.
 These options can be generally categorized as:

                     No action
                     Dredging
                     Covering

 Each option has costs and benefits (except for "no action").  The follow-
 ing assessments attempt to evaluate these factors in a manner that is
 realistic considering the present and potential uses of the water resource
 under study.

      Of utmost importance is the plan by the U.S.  Army Corps of Engineers'
 Chicago District to perform maintenance dredging in the near future,  with
 upland disposal and filtration of the return water from the diked disposal
 area.   With knowledge of  that plan,  this study has sought to accomplish
 the following tasks in arriving at recommendations:

                     Evaluate the Corps'  plans in the context of
                     Section 115 of PL92-500.

                     Evaluate modification to  the Corps'  plans.   For
                     example,  consider dredging a greater or lesser
                     area  to  a greater or lesser depth.

                     Evaluate options  that do  not include any dredging.

A.   DREDGING

     It  is  useful to  describe  the  dredging procedures commonly  used in
the United  States in  a brief and general  way  before  discussing  the site-
specific aspects of  the dredging option.

     Dredges can be classified  as mechanical  or  hydraulic.   Mechanical
dredges operate much  like land-based  excavation  equipment,  simply
digging sediment from the bottom and  transferring it to a hold.  The
hold is normally in a barge, which transports  the material  to a disposal
site.  The most commonly used mechanical dredge  is the clamshell.  A
clamshell dredge consists of a  crane-pulley-cable system mounted on a
barge.  The cables support and  control a set of  iron jaws that are
dropped, open, into the sediment where they are  closed, enveloping a
sediment mass that is then brought to the surface and dumped into a
barge.
                                    59

-------
     Hydraulic dredges operate by dislodging sediments and pumping them,
slurried with ambient water, through a pipe.  Although there are many
variants, the most commonly used dredges of this type are the cutterhead
and the hopper dredge.  A hopper dredge is an independent vessel and
normally pumps sediments into its hold ("hoppers") for transport to the
disposal site.  A cutterhead dredge has a spinning array of iron teeth
that mechanically dislodge sediments adjacent to the suction pipe inlet.
The slurried sediment is pumped through a discharge pipeline to the
disposal area, either in water outside the channel or in a diked area.

     1.   Present Plans for Dredging at Michigan City

     The Corps of Engineers plans to maintain the navigation project at
Michigan City with a cutterhead dredge, discharging to a confined upland
disposal site.  There are few data available regarding the water quality
effects of the various dredge plants because most aquatic investigations
have emphasized open-water disposal.  The available data do indicate,
however, that the planned dredging and disposal methods are the least
disruptive of the generally available options involving dredging and
disposal.

     The scope of planned maintenance dredging is best explained by
excerpts from the Corps'  Draft Environmental Impact Statement (30):

             "Project features to be maintained will consist of:

             An entrance channel starting at the detached breakwater
          and continuing to the second turning basin at Blocksom & Co.
          This channel will be maintained at a 12-foot depth lakeward
          of the entrance to the small-boat outer basin,  and at a 10-
          foot depth from the entrance to the outer boat basin upstream
          to the second turning basin at  Blocksom & Co.

             A channel in Trail Creek 6 feet deep from turning basin
          No. 2 to the E Street bridge.

             Turning basin No.  1 at Cargill Grain Co., which will be
          maintained at a 10-foot depth.

             Turning basin No.  2 at Blocksom & Co., which will also be
          maintained at a 10-foot depth.
             After the navigation channels have been surveyed,  dredging
          activities are conducted to remove channel shoals that have
          decreased channel depths to levels that are less than desired
          depths.   Based on past experience at Michigan City Harbor, it
          is anticipated that the portion of the harbor channel from
          the entrance to the small-boat outer basin upstream to the
          limit of the project in Trail Creek will require the removal
          of approximately 5,000 cubic yards of sediment per year to
                                     60

-------
 maintain safe  navigation depths.   In order to remove accumu-
 lated  sediments  in the  most  economical  manner,  this portion
 of  the channel will not be dredged annually,  but only once
 every  five  years with each dredging operation requiring the
 removal of  approximately 25,000 cubic yards of  sediment.
 Dredging in this portion of  the navigation project  is expec-
 ted to be performed by  a contract  hydraulic dredge.   The
 frequency of dredging operations in the channel from the
 entrance to the  small-boat outer basin  lakeward to  the de-
 tached breakwater to maintain  the  desired  12  foot depth is
 unknown due to past experience being confined to maintenance
 of  an  18-foot  channel.   This area  will  be  dredged as the
 need arises to maintain the  12 foot depth  and to provide
 for safe navigation.  This area will be dredged by  the Corps
 of  Engineers or  by a contractor using a clamshell or dipper
 dredge and  scows to transport  the  dredged  material.
   During 1968, 1969, and 1970,  the harbor  entrance  channel
was dredged by a dipper dredge and the dredged material was
deposited in an open-lake disposal area in  the amount of
25,000 to 48,000 cubic yards per year.  In  1971 and  1972,
the entrance channel was maintained by a dipper dredge with
the dredged materials being deposited near  the shoreline
west of the harbor area in the amount of 24,900 cubic yards
in 197L and 5,800 cubic yards in 1972.  No  maintenance
dredging has been performed since 1972, when it became
apparent that deep-draft commerce needing the 18-foot project
depth would not return.

Disposal of Dredged Material Unsuitable for Unrestricted
Disposal

  Material to be removed from the portion of the channel
from the entrance to the small-boat outer basin upstream
to the E Street bridge has been classified  by the
Administrator of the USEPA as unsuitable for unrestricted
or open-lake disposal.  Under Section 123 of the River
and Harbor Act of 1970 (PL 91-611), the Corps of Engineers
is required to confine polluted dredged materials in a
diked disposal facility to eliminate any further degradation
of water quality by open-lake disposal.  A  contained dis-
posal facility will therefore be built on a site that has
been approved by all local,  state and Federal regulatory
agencies.   Section 123 provides that the capacity of the
site will be sufficient to contain a 10-year period of
dredged material.   Engineering analysis and past experi-
ence at Michigan City have shown that approximately 5,000
                           61

-------
 cubic yards  of  sediments  must be dredged annually to main-
 tain desired depths  in the channels.   Therefore,  the
 contained  disposal facility has  been  designed with a
 50,000 cubic yard capacity to accommodate two dredging
 operations of 25,000 cubic yards each.
   During  dredging  operations,  the  hydraulic  dredge
will  discharge  directly  into  the  contained  disposal
facility through  a  pipeline extending between the
hydraulic  dredge  and  the contained  disposal facility.
This  pipeline will  float directly to the  disposal  site.
The pipeline will carry  a slurry  of approximately  90
percent water and 10  percent  sediment.  When  the slurry
is pumped  into  the  contained  disposal facility, the
water will exit the site through  the sand filter
leaving behind  the  drying sediments.  Water quality
monitoring of the contained disposal facility will be
made  before, during,  and after  disposal operations
to monitor the  effectiveness  of the sand  filter and
dike.  This water quality monitoring program  will
include sampling of physical, chemical, and biologi-
cal parameters  in coordination with the USEPA, State
of Indiana Department of  Natural  Resources  (DNR), and
the Indiana Stream Pollution  Control Board.   Immediate
remedial action will be  taken should the monitoring
reveal any water quality  problems.
Disposal of Dredged Material Suitable for Unrestricted
Disposal

   Dredged material to be removed from the harbor
entrance channel extending from the entrance to the
small-boat outer basin lakeward to the detached
breakwater has been classified by the Administrator
of the USEPA as suitable for unrestricted or open-lake
disposal.  The Chicago District's experience in main-
taining the authorized 18-foot channel at Michigan
City Harbor indicates that this entrance channel may
not need to be dredged frequently to maintain the
proposed 12-foot depth.  However, some dredging at
irregular periods will be needed.  Disposal of the
sediments from the entrance channel, consisting of
clean sand deposited by lake currents and storms as
littoral drift, will be disposed of in an open-lake
disposal area which has been approved by the Indiana
DNR."
                           62

-------
     2.   Relationship of Dredging Plans to In-Place Pollutants

     Figure 13 shows the areal extent of in-place pollutant deposits
that are not included in the planned maintenance dredging.  The approxi-
mate areas of these deposits are:  Yacht basin, 55,000 sq m; area to
the west of the navigation channel opposite the city wharf  (near Turning
Basin No. 1), 25,000 sq. m; E Street Bridge to wastewater treatment
plant, 17,000 sq m; Total 97,000 sq. m.  The area to be dredged is
approximately 106,000 sq m, practically equal to the polluted area out-
side the proposed maintenance project.

     At least as important as area is the depth of cut planned for the
dredging project and that which would be required to remove in-place
pollutants.  These depths are needed to compute the volumes (in situ) of
material to be dredged either under present plans for the navigation
channel or under any proposed plans for dredging to remove  in-place
pollutants.

     To calculate  the thickness of material to be removed,  the following
procedures have been used:

          a.   The study area was divided into six parts, based on
               such factors as water depth and location in  or out of
               the authorized channel.

          b.   For dredging to maintain desired depths, the actual
               average water depth in each area was subtracted from
               the desired depth.

          c.   For dredging to remove in-place pollutants,  the thick-
               ness of  the deposit was estimated from actual field
               data where possible.  Where the coring device struck
               hard clay, its progress was halted.  The length of
               soft core material retrieved, multiplied by  2 (see
               Appendix A), was  taken as the deposit thickness.  In
               the polluted area lakeward from Franklin Street Bridge,
               this thickness was fairly constant, averaging approxi-
               mately 1.3 meters.  From Franklin Street Bridge upstream,
               the small craft that could be used and the limited depth
               of  fall of  the corer prevented the corer from
               penetrating the entire thickness of in-place pollutant
               deposits.   In these areas, the deposit thickness was
               assumed  at  1.5 meters, an estimate based on  the thick-
               ness observed lakeward of Franklin Street Bridge.

The  results  of these computations are summarized in Table 17.

      The estimates of material to be dredged shown in Table 17 permit
the  following observations.
                                      63

-------
 LAKE  MICHIGAN
                 CITY
                                   POLLUTED  AREAS NOT WITHIN
                                       NAVIGATION PROJECT :
 SCALE IN  FEET
0 200 4OO  100   IZOO   ICOO
      Figure 13.  In-Place Pollutant Areas Outside Navigation  Project

-------
                       Table 17.   Summary of Areas and Volumes of In-Place
                       Pollutants  Compared to Proposed Maintenance Dredging
Location

Area
(sq m)
Yacht Basin 55,000
Yacht Basin to Franklin
St. Bridge, in channel 46,000
Yacht Basin to Franklin St.
Bridge, outside Channel 25,000
Franklin St. Bridge to
Turning Basin No. 2 38,000
Turning Basin No. 2 to
E Street Bridge 22,000
E St. Bridge to Waste-
water Treatment Plant 17,000
Total to maintain desired navigation
Total to maintain navigation and remc


Sediment
Maintain
Navigation
Only
Thickness (m)
Remove
Pollutants
0 0.7
0 1.3
0 1.3
1.4 1.5*
0.8 1.5*
0 1.5*
depths only
>ve in-place pollutants
Volume (cu m)
Maintain
Navigation Remove
Only Pollutants
0 39,000
0 60,000
0 33,000
53,000 57,000
18,000 33,000
0 26,000
71,000
248,000
*Estimates based on other parts of the study area.

-------
          a.   Corps of Engineers Volume Estimates

     The estimates quoted earlier in this section used historical infor-
mation.  Experience has shown a deposition rate of approximately 5,000
cubic yards per year, and PL 91-611 requires a capacity for a 10-year
period of dredged material.  Therefore, the planned 50,000 cubic yard
capacity (38,000 cu m) seems to be in accordance with the statute.
It should be recognized that computations based on our soundings (which
agree with 1976 soundings by the Corps' Chicago District) indicate that
substantially more volume than this must be dredged to restore the
planned depths.  While the planned capacity of the confined disposal
area may equal 10 years' sedimentation at Michigan City, it is less
than the present deposit in the navigation channel.  The only maintenance
within the last 10 years has been in the entrance channels.

          b.   Depth of Cut

     With the possible exception of the reach between Franklin Street
and E Street, maintenance dredging will not reach the bottom of in-place
pollutant deposits.

          c.   Volume of In-Place Pollutants

     Although many alternatives to the proposed disposal area were con-
sidered by the Corps (31), none was capable of handling such a large
volume as 248,000 cubic meters (324,000 cu yd).  It is unlikely that a
site can be found near the study area that could accommodate a confined
disposal area of this size.  If dredging is to be the means for removal
of in-place pollutants, the disposal site choice will be between:

               A large area, distant from Trail Creek, involving one
               long and difficult transport route, or

               Several smaller areas, closer to Trail Creek, involving
               several transport routes and shifting from one to
               another as each facility is filled.

     Cost estimates for facilities to hold 50,000 cu yd were performed
by the Corps of Engineers (29).  Construction costs, based on February
1976 price levels, ranged from $264,000 to $1,308,000.  The high figure
represents an offshore diked facility; disposal areas on land were
estimated to cost less than $300,000.  Operation and maintenance costs,
including hydraulic pipeline dredging, ranged from $4.60 to $6.90 per
cu yd.  The higher figure reflects higher transport costs for an offshore
diked disposal area.  Only a few acceptable sites were located,  even with
the 50,000 cu yd volume criterion.  Many sites proposed were unacceptable
because of wetland protection or anticipated difficulties in procurement
from private landowners.  If sites could be located for confined disposal
of all polluted materials, construction costs would probably be above

-------
 $2 million  (  30>000 x  $300,000)  and  operating  costs  would  be of  a
 similar magnitude  (324,000  x  $5  to $6  per  cu yard).   The total construc-
 tion cost plus  operating  cost would  thus be approximately  $4 million.

     With these difficulties  and high  costs, it  is logical to inquire
 about  the availability of processes  that could be used  to  detoxify  the
 dredged material so that  it might be acceptable  for  disposal in  Lake
 Michigan.  Moore and Newbry (32)  investigated  this possibility for
 dredged materials  in general:

          Biological treatment was found ineffective because the BOD
          of  the dredged  materials examined represented  only a small
          fraction of  the oxygen demand.   Variability of the material
          in  its physical and chemical characteristics was also  found
          to  be a  detriment to biological  treatment.

          Chemical treatment  was found useful, but only  for the  liquid
          fraction after  separation  into solid and liquid  fractions.
          Such  treatment  would therefore be in addition  to,  rather  than
          a substitute for, diked disposal.

          Physical treatment  by  vacuum filtration or sedimentation  often
          can be used,  but  would offer little  or no  benefit in comparison
          to  the diked disposal  option at  Michigan City.

 These  findings  offer no attractive alternatives  to diked disposal for
 Michigan City's in-place  pollutants.

 B.   COVERING

     Covering refers to the operation  of leaving in-place  pollutants where
 they are, and covering them with  a substance that prevents  or retards
 upward migration of pollutants.   The covering material may  itself provide
 desirable benthic  habitat (e.g.  clean  sand), or it may only be intended
 to seal the bottom sediments  (e.g. polymer film overlay).

     A large  number of  covering  options exists, including  combinations
of materials  and emplacement methods.  Before  investigating detailed
 options,  however,   it is useful to investigate  the specific environment
of Trail Creek/Michigan City Harbor as to  the practicality of covering
 the bottom.

     1.   Practical Considerations

     The immediate impression received by a visitor  to the study area is
that the entire waterway upstream to the E Street Bridge is devoted to
boat traffic.   There is no reason to expect this use of  the waterway to
decline.   This navigational use requires certain channel depths.
Experience has shown that shoals form  in Trail Creek within Michigan
                                    67

-------
 City,  necessitating periodic dredging operations.   It can therefore be
 expected that periodic maintenance dredging will occur for the fore-
 seeable future.

      This situation leaves only one option that  could include covering
 of the bottom in the navigation channel:   dredging of present sediments
 below authorized depth,  followed by covering,  with future maintenance
 dredging limited to the recently deposited sediments  above the cover.
 Outside the navigation channel,  a wider range  of options  exists;  however,
 a piecemeal approach to different harbor  zones is  likely  to be costly in
 comparison to a  more unified approach to  ameliorating in-place pollutants.

      2.    Possible  Covering Methods

      If  covering is seriously considered,  either after dredging in  the
 navigation channel  or independently outside  the  navigation channel,
 several  methods  may be applicable.

           a.   Cover Materials

     Four  categories of  burial materials  can be  considered:   inert
 materials,  chemically active materials, sorbents,  and sealing agents.

               (1)  Inert Materials.   Included  in this category are
 coarse materials  such as sand, gravel, crushed stone,  and  crushed glass.
 Fine-grained  materials  that  may  be  useful  include  commercially and
 naturally  available clays  and diatomaceous earth.  Fine-grained materials
 should be  effective in  retarding  leaching  of the spilled material.
 Recommended cover thicknesses vary  with both the material  (clays being
 much less  permeable than sands and  gravels, for  example) and  the benthic
 life of  the area.   Potential  benthic  activity has  been  suggested as  an
 important  factor  in determining  covering depths  because some  species
 can enhance leaching  by  their burrowing activity in the cover  material.
 Approximately 10  to  20 cm  is  the minimum effective cover if such organisms
 are likely to colonize the cover material.

               (2)  Chemically Active Materials.  One  covering  strategy
 that could be considered is  the placement of a chemical compound over
 the in-place pollutants.  This compound would be "active" with  respect
 to the in-place pollutants;  i.e. it would react with  those pollutants
 to form less toxic products.  This  approach has  some  promise  in areas
with a specific in-place pollutant, such as the  site  of a hazardous
material spill.  At Michigan City, however, the  in-place pollutants of
 concern are a diverse mixture of substances.  It is very improbable
 that a mixture of chemically active covering compounds could be developed
 that would be effective against all the observed in-place pollutants.

               (3)  Sorbents.  Sorption processes have long been consi-
dered among the most promising treatment methods for  spills of hazardous
                                     68

-------
 materials in water.  Activated carbon and several ion exchangers have
 been evaluated for response to hazardous chemical spills (33, 34).  These
 substances have the same problems as those noted above for the chemically
 active materials,  however.
                    Sealing Agents.   Grouts, cements, soil sealants,
 polymer covers,  and gels have been investigated for this report.  These
 substances are advantageous because they seal off the entire mass of in-
 place pollutants and are not specific in acting toward any one substance
 or class of substances.   They are expensive,  however.   Grouting and
 cementing can be applied over in-place pollutants using materials ranging
 from modified Portland cement to simple mixtures of pozzolanics such as
 lime,  fly ash,  and diatomaceous earth.   Techniques could range from hand
 application to  pressurized grouting systems such as are used in the off-
 shore oil industry.   Such techniques produce  a solid cover.   Soil sealants
 might be used in the covering of in-place pollutants.   These are expanding
 Bentonite clays,  and would be difficult to put in place and  keep in place.
 Mixing of clays  with coarser-grained materials such as gravel might inhibit
 erosion.   The material could be pressure injected onto the bottom or
 dispersed on the surface according  to supplier's instructions.   Expense
 and  tendencies for erosion limit the potential of soil sealants.

     A barge-mounted concept of roller  deployment for  performed polymer
 films  has been proposed  (35,  36,  37).   Costs  would be  three  to  four cents
 per  square foot  (based on 1972  prices,  certainly higher today).

     Application  of  gelling  agents  to seal off  polluted sediments  has
 not  been  made, though  work on land  and  surface  spills  provides  hope that
 such materials could be  developed (34,  38).   The key problem with  such  a
 concept would be  to  find  a gelling  agent  with sufficient  specific  gravity
 to remain on  the  bottom.   It is  likely  that highly portable  application
 devices could be  developed.

     3.   Assessment of Covering Concepts

     None of the  covering methods described above  has ever been used on
a large scale.  Some small-scale attempts have been made  to  cover mercury-
laden sediments in Sweden, but  these have met with limited success.  With
this lack of field success, it is difficult to justify a recommendation
to attempt covering the in-place pollutants at Michigan City.  There are
several conceptual difficulties in predicting success of the covering option:

               Emplacement techniques and equipment presently available
               cannot assure complete coverage.

               The available materials that are sufficiently  impermeable
               to retard leaching (clays, cements, grouts) are either
               susceptible to erosion or are so permanent that they
               foreclose  on future options for use of the waterway.
                                     69

-------
               The available materials that would stay in place  (sands,
               gravels) are too permeable to retard leaching.

               Because of the absence of field experience, costs cannot
               be estimated with any confidence.

     Accordingly, covering cannot be recommended for actual implementation
at Michigan City unless and until field demonstrations have been conducted.
The intent of Section 115 is action, while the technology of covering is
still in the research stage.

C.   SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

     This section has shown that the state-of-the-art for covering and for
treatment of dredged materials is not sufficiently well advanced to
warrant action in a field situation such as at Michigan City.  It has
also pointed out that maintenance dredging for navigation purposes can
be expected to continue periodically.  Accordingly,"dredging followed by
confined disposal of In-place pollutants should be coordinated with
channel maintenance for effective implementation of  Section 115 action
at Michigan City.
                                     70

-------
                                REFERENCES
 1.   Johanson,  E.E.  and Johnson,  J.C.,  "Identifying and Prioritizing
          Locations  for the Removal of  In-Place Pollutants," final
          Report on  Contract No.  68-01-2920,  U.S.  Environmental
          Protection Agency, Washington DC, May 1976.

 2.   Trident Engineering Associates, Inc.,  "Evaluation of the  Problem
          Posed by In-place Pollutants  in Baltimore Harbor and Recom-
          mendation  of Corrective Action,"  Report  No.  EPA-440/5-77-015B,
          September  1977.

 3.   Morgan, D.W., "A Study of the Effect of  the NIPSCO Michigan City
          Generating Station on Salmonid Migrations in Trail Creek,"
          Third Biannual Report to Northern Indiana Public Service
          17 January 1977.

 4.   McComish,  T.S., "Interspecies Relationships of Fish in Indiana
          Waters of  Lake Michigan," Ball State Univ.,  Muncie,  IN, 1975

 5.   Environmental Instrument Systems,  Inc.,  "Report on the Effects of
          Michigan City Water Works Filter  Backwash on Trail Creek,"
          Michigan City Department of Water Works, November 24, 1976.

 6.   Morgan, D.W., "A Study of the Effect of  the NIPSCO Michigan City
          Power Station on Salmonid Migrations in  Trail Creek," First
          Semi-Annual Report to Northern Indiana Public Serice Co.,
          Hammond, IN, January 1976.

 7.   Morgan, D.W., "A Study of the Effect of  the NIPSCO Michigan City,
          Generation Station on Salmonid Migrations in Trail Creek,"
          Second Biannual Report to Northern  Indiana Public Service Co.,
          Hammond, IN, 16 July 1976.

 8.   Johnson, D.L.,  "Zooplankton Population Dynamics in Indiana Waters
          of Lake Michigan in 1970," Unpublished M.S.  Thesis,  Ball State
          Univ., Muncie, IN, 1972.

 9.   Rains, J.H,,  "Macrobenthos Population Dynamics in Indiana Waters
          of Lake Michigan in 1970," unpublished M.S.  Thesis,  Ball State
          Univ., Muncie, IN, 1971.

10.   Indiana State Board of Health and  Indiana Stream Pollution Control
          Board, "Indiana Water Quality-Monitor Station Records, Rivers
          and Streams, 1975."

11.   U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,  "Quality Criteria for Water,"
          Report No. EPA/440/9-76/023,  July 1976.
                                    71

-------
12.  Lee, G.F. and Plumb, R.H.,  "Literature Review on Research Study
          for the Development of Dredged Material Disposal Criteria."
          Contract Report D-74-1, U.S. Array Engineers Waterways
          Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, June 1974.

13.  Lee, G.F., ert al, "Research Study for the Development of Dredged
          Material Disposal Criteria," Contract Report D-75-4,
          U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg,
          MS, 1975.

14.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, "Guidelines for the
          Pollutional Classification of Great Lakes Harbor Sediments,"
          EPA Region V, Chicago, IL, April, 1977.

15.  Bowden, R.J., EPA Region V, Chicago, personal communication
          (letter), August 26, 1977.

16.  Mason, W.T., Jr., "An Introduction to the Identification of
          Chironomid Larvae, Analytical Quality Control Laboratory,"
          U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1973.

17.  Hiltunen, J.K., "Keys to the Tubificid and Naidid Oligochaeta
          of the Great Lakes Region," Unpublished (mimeograph), 1973.

18.  Brinkhurst, R.O., "The Biology of the Tubificidae with Special
          Reference to Pollution," Proc. 3rd Seminar Biological
          Problems in Water Pollution, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1965.

19.  Martin, D.M., "Freshwater Laboratory Bioassays - A Tool in
          Environmental Decisions," Phila. Acad. Nat. Sci., Contrib.
          Dept. Limnol. No. 3, 1973.

20.  American Public Health Association, Standard Methods for the
          Examination of Water and Wastewater, 14th ed., 1976.

21.  Gannon, J.E. and Beeton, A.M., "Studies on the Effects of
          Dredged Materials for Selected Great Lakes Harbors on
          Plankton and Benthos," Center for Great Lakes Studies,
          Univ. Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Special Report No. 8, 1969.

22.  Gannon, J.E. and Beeton, A.M., "Procedures for Determining
          the Effects of Dredged Sediments on Biota - Benthos
          Viability and Sediment Selectivity Tests," J. Water Poll.
          Cont. Fed., _4J3, 3, March 1971.

23.  Prater, B.L. and Anderson,  M.A., "A 96-hour Bioassay of
          Otter Creek, Ohio," J. Water Poll. Cont. Fed., _4j),
          10, Oct. 1977.
                                   72

-------
24.   Lee, G.F.  and Plumb, R.H., "Literature Review on Research
          Study for the Development of Dredged Material Disposal
          Criteria," Contract Report D-74-1, U.S. Army Engineer
          Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, June 1974.

25.   Heberger,  R., Great Lakes Fishery Laboratory, U.S. Fish and
          Wildlife Service, Ann Arbor, MI, personal communication.

26.   Gannon, J.E., "The Ecology of Lake Michigan Zooplankton - A
          Review with Special Emphasis on the Calumet Area,"
          Appendix B in; Snow, R.H., "Water Pollution Investigation
          Calumet Area of Lake Michigan," Report No. EPA-905/9-74-011-B,
          Vol.  2 (Appendices), 1974.

27.   Environmental Protection Agency/Corps of Engineers Technical
          Committee on Criteria for Dredged and Fill Material,
          "Ecological Evaluation of Proposed Discharge of Dredged
          Material into Ocean Waters," U.S. Army Engineer Waterways
          Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, 1977.

28.   Harris, E.K., "Confidence Limits for the LD50 Using the
          Moving Average - Angle Method," Biometrics, 15: 424-432
          1959.

29.   Unpublished data, Indiana State Board of Health.

30.   Chicago District, Corps of Engineers, "Draft Environmental
          Impact Statement Relating to Operation and Maintenance
          Activities at Michigan City Harbor, Indiana," August 1977.

31.   Chicago District, Corps of Engineers, "Letter report on
          Confined Disposal Area for Michigan City Harbor, Indiana,"
          May 1976.

32.   Moore, T.K and Newbry, B.W., "Treatability of Dredged Material
          (Laboratory Study)," Technical Report D-76-2, U.S. Army
          Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, 1976.

33.   Bauer, W. , jejt a.1, "Agents, Methods and Devices for Amelioration
          of Discharges of Hazardous Chemicals on Water," Report
          number CG-D-38-76, Department of Transportation, United
          States Coast Guard, Office of Research and Development,
          Washington, DC, August 1975.

34.   Pilie, R.J., eit_ a.L, "Methods to Treat, Control, and Monitor
          Spilled Hazardous Materials," report EPA-670/2-75-042,
          National Environmental Research Center, Office of Research
          and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
          Cincinnati, OH, June 1975.
                                    73

-------
35.  Widman, M. and Epstein, M., "Polymer Film Overlay System for
          Mercury Contaminated Sludge - Phase I," U.S. Environmental
          Protection Agency Water Pollution Control Research Series
          No. 16080HTZ 05/72, May 1972.

36.  Epstein, M. and Widman, M., "Coatings for Ocean Bottom
          Stabilization," paper presented at 158th Meeting, American
          Chemical Society, New York, NY, 1969.

37.  Roe, T., £t al, "Chemical Overlays for Seafloor Sediments,"
          paper no. OTC 1170 presented at the Second Offshore
          Technology Conference, Houston, TX, May 1970.

38.  Ziegler, R. and LaFornara, J.,  "In-Situ Treatment Methods for
          Hazardous Materials Spills," paper presented at 1972
          Hazardous Materials Conference, March 21-23, 1972,
          Houston,  Texas.
                                     74

-------
                                APPENDIX A

      RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CORE LENGTH AND DEPTH OF SEDIMENT SAMPLED

     In a classic piece of work reported in 1941, K.O. Emery and R.S.
Dietz (A-l) developed a gravity coring device very similar to that used
in this study from the RV MYSIS.  The cited paper includes very detailed
observations on the mechanics of sediment coring.  These observations
are germane to this report because of the need to interpret core sample
lengths with respect to the in situ depth of sediment represented.  Some
of Emery and Dietz1s discussions are summarized here and applied to the
Michigan City Harbor/Trail Creek coring effort.  Reference to the original
paper is highly recommended for more detailed discussion.

     Before investigating the factors that Emery and Dietz found impor-
tant, it is necessary to note some factors that they found were not
important.  The fact that cores are shorter than the depth sampled is
not primarily caused by:

          Loss of sediment from the core-tube.  This investigation
          used a core retainer, preventing the escape of sediment
          during retrieval.

          Compaction/escape of water.  Emery and Dietz could explain
          only a 3% length reduction from this mechanism.  This study
          found core samples to have water contents similar to ponar
          grabs, which should approximate in situ water content.

          "Slumping" within the core-tube.  The inner diameter of the
          core nose is smaller than that of the core liner.  Therefore,
          the sediment cylinder that enters the core liner can "slump"
          or shorten as it expands laterally to fill the core liner.
          Emery and Dietz found that this mechanism could account for
          only about half of the observed shortening of cores.

          Collection of only the top layers of sediment.  When a
          coring device is retrieved with 100 cm of mud on the out-
          side but only 50 cm of core, one potential explanation is
          that after 50 cm, the corer kept penetrating but no more
          sediment entered.  Emery and Dietz showed by theoretical
          arguments and experimental evidence that this does not
          happen.

     The mechanics of coring that are important in deciding how much
depth a core or core increment represents are briefly described as
follows:  As the coring device proceeds through the sediment, the sedi-
ment layers are downwarped and thrust aside.  In addition, the core
inside the core liner develops frictional resistance, as does the sedi-
ment outside the corer-tube.
                                     75

-------
     Near the surface of the sediment, there is relatively low resistance
to penetration  (low percent solids) and low friction  (short lengths of
sediment-corer contact).  At depth, where the sediment becomes denser
(higher percent solids), both the resistance to penetration and the fric-
tional resistance to core entry into the tube increases.  That is, it is
more difficult for sediment to enter it.  Emery and Dietz found that in
most recently sedimented deposits, these factors increase in approximate
equivalence with depth such that the incremental core length per incremen-
tal depth penetrated is approximately constant throughout the length of a
core.  That is, if the top 6 cm of core represent 11 cm of sediment, then
the bottom 6 cm of core also represents 11 cm of sediment.

     Another finding of Emery and Dietz was that hundred of cores ranged
from 40% to 70% in the ratio
                                 core length
                              depth penetrated
The average was 50%.
     In this study, where a corer similar to that of Emery and Dietz was
used, it has been assumed that all increments of any one core represent
consistent penetration increments, and that the ratio of core length to
depth penetration for those increments and for each core as a whole is 50%.
                                  Reference
Al.  Emery, K.O. and Dietz, R.S., "Gravity Coring Instrument and Mechanics
     of Sediment Coring," Bulletin of the Geological Society of America,
     Vol. 52, pp 1685-1714, Oct. 1, 1941.
                                     76

-------
                              APPENDIX B

                ANALYTIC METHODS FOR WATER AND SEDIMENT

     Analysis of water and sediment samples was performed by JBF and several
other laboratories in the Boston area.  Selection of each laboratory was
based on its specific capability to perform each analysis that was assigned.

     Each laboratory had its own internal quality control procedures.  In
addition, JBF provided blind replicates to confirm that the expected precision
of each method was being achieved, and blind spiked samples to confirm the
expected accuracies.

Arsenic in Water

     These analysis were performed by Herbert V. Shuster, Inc., Boston, Mass.
The gaseous hydride method was used, with sodium borohydride to produce arsine,
which was analyzed by atomic absorption spectrophotometry.  The method is
described in Ref. (Bl).

Arsenic in Sediment

     Digestions of sediments were performed by JBF (see "Heavy Metals in
Sediment - a. Digestion", below).  Digests were analyzed by H. V. Shuster,  Inc.
with the method for water described above.

Ammonia in Water

     These analyses were performed by Interex Corporation of Natick, Mass.
The Nesslerization method (direct, following distillation) was used  (B2).

Heavy Metals in Sediment and Water

     a.   Digestion

     All samples  for metals were digested in accordance with Ref.  (B3) by
JBF.  The procedure  ("Metals", Section  4.1.3 in the reference) features
nitric acid digestion followed by solution in warm hydrochloric acid.

     b.   Analysis

     All digests  for metals were analyzed by atomic absorption spectro-
photometry.  With the exception of arsenic, all analyses were performed  by
direct aspiration of the digest in accordance with Ref.  (B3).

Immediate Oxygen  Demand in Sediment

     This test was performed in the field by JBF, with a procedure described
in Ref.  (B4).  Because the method is  not described in standard analytic
references, it is described below.
                                      77

-------
 Sample  Collection  and Handling

      Care must be  taken  to avoid oxidation of  the  sample before  test.   The
 sample  for  testing,  therefore,  should be extracted from the mass of  the
 sediment in the  sampling device with minimal air contact.  A disposable
 plastic syringe  (10  or 20 cc) is inserted into the interior of the sediment
 mass  for handling  the sediment  and delivering  it to the test container.
 When  the sediment  is reasonably compacted, the bottom of the syringe is cut
 off and the cylinder is used to bore a sample.  If the sediment  has  a  larger
 water content, a smaller hole is bored through the bottom of the cylinder
 and the sediment drawn into the syringe.  Even a diluted hydraulic dredge
 slurry  can  be accommodated in a properly prepared  syringe.  Once the sample
 is in the syringe, it can be weighed without undue exposure to the air,  and
 the sample  can be  discharged directly into the test container.   This is
 done  below  the water surface to avoid contact with air.

 Dilution Medium  for Sediment

      Large variations in water  quality are possible at potential dredging
 sites and disposal areas.  Therefore, it seems appropriate to use one  or
 two standard types of dilution  water for the IOD test.  It is not necessary
 to use  nutrient-enriched media  as in the BOD methods because the oxygen-
 demanding phenomena in the IOD  test are largely nonbiogenic.  No matter
 what  dilution water is used, it should be close to saturation with respect
 to air  at the test temperature.  It should also be free of oxygen-demanding
 substances.  Tap water (source:  Lake Michigan) was used in this project.

      In all  the  previous IOD tests, a single dilution was made with  a
 recommended quantity of sediment.  This practice ignores the fact that  the
 concentration of DO can be measured more accurately at higher oxygen concen-
 trations.  A typical DO meter response is 90 percent in 10 sec at a  constant
 (30°C)  temperature.  However,  at low DO values the 90 percent reading  takes
 30 sec  to reach.   Because the accuracy of the DO reading may be  + 0.3 mg/£,
 a small oxygen depletion should be avoided.   These problems can  Fe avoided
 by conducting the laboratory IOD test on at least  two, preferably three,
 different dilutions.   The results from dilutions showing 40 to 70 percent
 depletion are the most reliable and should be the only results considered
 acceptable.

 Time

     Fifteen minutes has been arbitrarily selected as the IOD test time.
This  time can be maintained as  the standard if the oxygen-depletion  criteria
 stated above are adhered to by making the proper sediment dilutions.   Using
a longer time interval makes the test more cumbersome from an analytical
viewpoint.   Under some special  circumstances it may be instructive to
 follow the DO concentration past the 15-min limit.   However, this time
 interval is suitable for the purposes of a standardized IOD test.
                                      78

-------
Mixing

     Mixing at the membrane surface of the DO probe is necessary to obtain
an accurate reading.  A BOD mixing accessory is available from many DO
meter vendors which would Induce a current in the vicinity of the probe
membrane.  This current would not, however, maintain the bulk of the
sediments in suspension.  A magnetic stirrer can be used for this purpose.
However, it must be used with the proper precautions.  Because magnetic
stirrers tend to give off heat, they can raise the water temperature in the
container within the 15-min testing period.  Suitable insulation can be
used to reduce this effect.  Proper correction on the instrument for the
temperature changes that do take place is necessary for accurate DO measure-
ments.  When using the magnetic stirrer to induce a current across the
membrane surface, it must be remembered that the water in the center of the
BOD bottle is swirling at a slower rate than at the perimeter.  A sufficient
stirring rate can be obtained by placing the probe in the dilution water
and finding a stirrer setting that does not cause any appreciable change  in
the meter readings when the setting is increased or decreased slightly.

Calculation

     For the IOD on a sediment dry weight basis, the calculation is as
follows:

                    •mn m»/ir« .       mg/kg IOD (wet basis
                    IOD mg/kg -    % golids (declmal fraction)
                                    (DO.   , - - DO...   .) x  0.3
where:    mg/kg IOD  (wet basis) -  - initial   — final    -
           «'"*      v         '    grams of sediment  in aliquot

The 0.3 term  (300 m  ) is the volume of a standard  BOD bottle.

Oil and Grease in Sediment

     Interex  Corporation performed these analyses  using Freon as  the
solvent in the Soxhlet extraction procedure (B2).

PCS in Water  and Sediment

     Herbert  V. Shuster, Inc. performed these analyses in accordance with
Ref. (B5).  The method was modified by use of acetonitrile/petroleum ether
instead of DMF/hexane and liquid/solid chromatographic cleanup with
Floresil PR in place of alumina.

TKN in Sediment

     These tests were done by Interex Corporation  using the standard
Kjeldahl method with Nessler finish (B2) .
                                    79

-------
Particle Size Distribution in Sediment




     JBF performed these tests using ASTM Method D422-63 (Reapproved 1972)




Percent Solids and Percent Volatile Solids in Sediment




     JBF performed these tests using Standard Methods (B2).
                                     80

-------
                           REFERENCES - APPENDIX B

Bl.  Fernandez, F.J. "Atomic Absorption Determination of Gaseous
     Hydrides Utilizing Sodium Borohydride Reduction,"
     Atomic Absorption Newsletter, 12, 4, July-Aug. 1973.

B2.  American Public Health Association, Standard Methods for the
     Examination of Water and Wastewater, 14th ed., Washington D.C., 1975.

B3.  "Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes", Report
     No. EPA-625-/6-74003, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
     Washington, B.C., 1974.

B4.  Neal, R.W., Pojasek, R.B., and Johnson, J.C., "Oxygenation of
     Dredged Material by Direct Injection of Oxygen and Air During
     Open-Water Pipeline Disposal," Report No. D-77-15, U.S. Army
     Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS, Oct. 1977.

B5.  "Analysis of Environmental Materials for Polychlorinated Biphenyls,"
     Monsanto Chemical Co. Laboratory Analytical Chemistry Method 71-35
     as revised November 1970.
                                    81

-------
                               APPENDIX C

                            BIOASSAY METHODS

 Stock Cultures

     Cyclops bicuspidatus thomasi, Daphnia galeata mendotae and
 Pontoporeia affinis were collected from Northern Lake Michigan with a
 0.5-m diameter No. 6 mesh (239 ym) net.  Cyclops and Daphnia were obtained
 by towing the net vertically through the epilimnion.  Pontoporeia were
 collected at night by towing the net horizontally near bottom.  This method
 is most effective, since Pontoporeia migrate from the sediments into the
 water column at night (Cl).  All net tows were made at slow speeds
 (0.5 m/sec) to minimize damage to the organisms.

     Collections were immediately transported to the Biological Station's
 Lakeside Laboratory and specimens were isolated for monoculture.  Daphnia
 were removed from the plankton samples with a glass pipette (Pasteur type)
 and transferred to 475-ml glass jars.  Cyclops were segregated by concen-
 trating 4,000 to 8,000 organisms in a 1-liter bottle and adding 3 to 6 ml
 of an aqueous food suspension (described below).  The container was sealed
 and held for 12 hours.  This technique decreased the dissolved oxygen
 level, resulting in the death of all organisms except Cyclops and
 Holopedium.  Holopedium were removed and the Cyclops were transferred to
 3.8 liter glass jars.  Both Cyclops and Daphnia were maintained in fil-
 tered (25 urn) Lake Michigan water (from Little Traverse Bay).  Pontoporeia
 were separated from the smaller crustaceans by passing the tow sample
 through a No. 30 (600 urn) sieve.  Pontoporeia were then transferred to
 20.8-liter aquaria containing Lake Michigan water and sediments (from
 Little Traverse Bay).

     The culture vessels containing these organisms were kept in a refri-
 gerated incubator (Forma Scientific Model 23) with controlled temperatures
 of 6-9°C for Pontoporeia and 12-15°C for Cyclops and Daphnia.  Aeration
 of the culture water was provided prior to transfer of Daphnia. to minimize
 their entrapment in the surface film.  Continual aeration was provided for
 Cyclops (2-4 ml/min.) and Pontoporeia (80-120 ml/min.).  Water was changed
 daily for Daphnia, twice weekly for Cyclops, and biweekly for Pontoporeia.

     Pontoporeia and Cyclops were fed a ground mixture of Glencoe fish
 pellets and Cerophyl (20 to 1 by weight) which was freshly prepared each
week and kept under refrigeration.  Pontoporeia were fed by sprinkling the
mixture over the water surface three to four times per week (^0,5 g/100
 individuals).  For Cyclops,  the mixture was prepared as an aqueous suspen-
 sion (4 g of this mixture in 100 ml deionized water) which was then filtered
 through a 54-um mesh screen.  Cyclops were fed the filtrate three times
weekly (1 ml/3.8 liters culture medium).

     Daphnia were more difficult to maintain in the laboratory.  Cultures
would die off within approximately 7 to 14 days when being fed the Glencoe
 fish pellet-Cerophyl suspension and mixed algae cultures.  Daphnia cultures
                                      82

-------
were maintained successfully with  the  following  technique  supplied  by
J. Marshall^:  Daphnia were fed  Chlamydomonas  reinhardtii^ daily (^2  X lu
cells/vessel).  The  success of this method  lies  principally in maintaining
the food supply in continuous suspension.   The mobility  of Chlamydomonas
reinhardtii in the culture medium  permits efficient  ingestion of this
small flagellate by  the  filter-feeding Daphnia.   This  provided adequate
populations of 90-160 organisms/vessel.

     Salmo gairdneri were obtained from  the Michigan Department  of  Natural
Resources Oden Fish Hatchery as  fingerlings (7 to  10 cm) and rapidly  trans-
ported  (<30 min.) to the Biological Station laboratory.  The fish were
promptly transferred to  19-liter glass containers  placed in a continuously
running cold water bath  (11 to 12°C) in  the aquarium room.   Acclimation to
the Douglas Lake water supply came in  two steps.   The  fish were  initially
placed in a 1 to 1 ratio of Douglas Lake and Fish  Hatchery water for  24
hours, then transferred  to 100% Douglas Lake water.  Water temperature in
the laboratory was maintained within 0.5°C  of  the  Fish Hatchery  water.
The water supply was aerated (80-170 ml/min.)  to ensure adequate oxygen
levels  (saturated conditions).  The high feeding levels at the Fish
Hatchery caused high metabolic waste accumulation  requiring daily water
renewal.

     Salmo were fed 3/32-inch (0.24 cm) Glencoe  fish pellets (0.3-5 g
fish"1 day"1).  They were allowed  to acclimate for one week before  testing.

     Laboratory physiocochemical conditions for  the  test organisms  were
maintained as closely as possible  to those  observed  in the field.   Temp-
erature, dissolved oxygen and pH were  regularly monitored.   Temperature
and dissolved oxygen were measured with a YSI  model  51B oxygen meter  and
pH was determined with a Beckman model H-5  pH  meter.   Temperature was
maintained within a range of 1.0°C, dissolved  oxygen within 2 mg/liter
(near saturation),  and pH within 0.5 units.  Organisms were not  fed
during laboratory experiments.

Test Materials and Equipment

     All test chambers were glass.   Only tygon or glass tubing (for
aeration)  entered the test vessels.  Sediments were  handled  only with
stainless steel and polyethylene instruments.

     Sediments and site water were collected by a JBF  Scientific  Corpora-
tion field crew on 14-17 April 1977.   They were stored and  transported  in
a refrigerated condition.  They were received at the Biological Station
on 18 April 1977 and promptly stored in a walk-in cooler with temperature
regulated between 0 and 4°C.
 J. Marshall, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL.
2
 From the Culture Collection of Algae, Department of Botany, University
 of Texas,  Austin, TX.
                                     83

-------
     Water collected at the control station site was used for assays with
Cyclops, Daphnia and Pontoporeia.  Filtered (64 ym) Douglas Lake Water was
used for experiments with Salmo.   Chemical characteristics of the various
water supplies used for cultures are listed in Table C-l.
                                     84

-------
    Table C-l.  Chemical Characteristics of Water  Supplies  Used
            in Maintenance and Culture of  the  Test Organisms
Chemical
Variable
PH
Alkalinity*
(as CaCO3)
§
Conductivity
Total - p**
NO 3 - N**
NH3 - N**
Ca*
Mg*
K*
Na*
Cl*
Si02
Lake Michigan ( '
* 8.5
109
261
—
129
15
37.4
—
—
—
7.2
0.3
\ (rv
Douglas Lakev '
8.5
115.3
249.5
18.7
53.4
33.9
31.2
11.0
0.7
2.3
5.4
1.0
1 Fish Hatchery (
8.1
164
300
20
600
20
42
14
0.7
—
2
8
 *mg/liter

 §jjmhos/cm @25°C

**yg/liter
                                                                         (C4)
                                     85

-------
                         REFERENCES - APPENDIX C


Cl.  Marzolf, G.R., "Vertical Migration of Pontoporeia affinis  (Amphipoda)
          in Lake Michigan," Proc. 8th Conf. Great Lakes Research,
          Univ. of Michigan, Great Lakes Res. Div., Pub. No. 13, 1965.

C2.  Schelske, C.L. and J.C. Roth, "Limnological Survey of Lakes Michigan,
          Superior, Huron and Erie," Univ. of Michigan, Great Lakes Res.
          Div., Publ. No. 17, 108 p., 1973.

C3.  Gannon, J.E., Univ. of Michigan Biological Station, unpublished data.

C4.  Newton, M.E. and M. Wuerthele, "Analysis of Selected Michigan Fish
          Hatchery Water Supply and Discharge Samples, Water Resour. Comm.
          Michigan Dept. Nat. Resour., Lansing, 1970.
                                     86

-------
                                   TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
                            (Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
  EPA-440/5-78-012
                                                           3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
  IN-PLACE  POLLUTANTS  IN  TRAIL  CREEK AND MICHIGAN  CITY
  HARBOR,  INDIANA
             5. REPORT DATE
              August  1978
             6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
                                                           8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
     JBF Scientific Corporation
     2 Jewel  Drive
     Wilmington, Massachusetts   01887
             10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.

                2BH 413
             11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
                                                              68-01-4336
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
     Office of Water Planning  Standards
     U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency
     401  M Street, S.W.
     Washington, D.C.  20460
             13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
               Final
             14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
                EPA 700/01
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
          The sediments of much  of Trail  Creek and Michigan  City Harbor are toxic  to
     several  species of desirable  aquatic organisms and  condusive to extreme dominance
     by  a few species that are  known to tolerate grossly polluted benthic environments,
     Although the overlying waters also show some signs  of pollution, salmonid migra-
     tions do pass through the area.   This indicates that severely toxic discharges
     have been abated and are now  evidenced by the in-place  pollutants that were
     deposited in past years.   It  appears that removal of these deposits would be  a
     fruitful and worthwhile operation.   However, before such  action is taken, the
     importance of a large landfill  as a  potential source of future pollutants should
     be  assessed.  If the landfill  is  shown to be unimportant,  dredging with disposal
     in  a land-based, confined disposal  area is recommended.   The cost of such a
     program  could exceed $4 million,  but cost sharing with  the Corps of Engineers in
     their navigation maintenance  program in the Creek and Harbor would significantly
     reduce the section 115 funds  required
17.
                                KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
                  DESCRIPTORS
    Environmental  Research
    Sediments
    Water  Quality
    Bioassay  (Sediment)
                                              b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS  c. COSATI Field/Group
 Trail  Creek
 Michigan City Harbor
 Pollution
 Dredging
13 B
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT

    Release to  Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)

  Unclassified	
                                                                         21. NO. OF PAGES
                                              20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
                                                Unclassified
                                                                         22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)

-------
                                                          INSTRUCTIONS

     1.   REPORT NUMBER
         Insert the EPA report number as it appears on the cover of the publication.

     2.   LEAVE BLANK

     3.   RECIPIENTS ACCESSION NUMBER
         Reserved for use by each report recipient.

     4.   TITLE AND SUBTITLE
         Title should indicate clearly and briefly the subject coverage of the report, and be displayed prominently. Set subtitle, if used, in smaller
         type or otherwise subordinate it to main title. When a report is prepared in more than one volume, repeat the primary title, add volume
         number and include subtitle for the specific title.

    5.   REPORT DATE
         Each report shall carry a date indicating at least month and year. Indicate the basis on which it was selected (e.g., datf of issue, date of
        approval, date of preparation, etc.).

    6.   PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
         Leave blank.

    7.   AUTHOR(S)
         Give name(s) in conventional order (John R. Doe, J. Robert Doe, etc.).  List author's affiliation if it differs from the performing organi-
         zation.

    8.   PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER
        Insert if performing organization wishes to assign this number.

    9.  PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
        Give name,  street, city, state, and  ZIP code.  List no more than two levels of an organizational hirearchy.

    10.  PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER
        Use the program element number  under which the report was prepared.  Subordinate numbers may be included in parentheses.

    11.  CONTRACT/GRANT NUMBER
        Insert contract or grant number under which report was prepared.

    12.  SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
        Include ZIP code.

    13.  TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
        Indicate interim final, etc., and if applicable, dates covered.

    14.  SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
        Leave blank.

    15.  SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
        Enter  information not included elsewhere but useful, such as: Prepared  in cooperation with, Translation of, Presented at conference of,
        To be published in, Supersedes, Supplements, etc.

    16.  ABSTRACT
        Include a brief (200 words or less) factual summary of the most significant information contained in the report.  If the report contains a
        significant bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.

    17.  KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT  ANALYSIS
        (a) DESCRIPTORS - Select from the Thesaurus of Engineering and Scientific Terms the proper authorized terms that identify the major
        concept of the research and are sufficiently specific and precise to be used as index entries for cataloging.

        (b) IDENTIFIERS AND OPEN-ENDED TERMS - Use identifiers for project names, code names, equipment designators, etc. Use open-
        ended terms written in descriptor form for those subjects for which no descriptor exists.

        (c) COSATI FIELD GROUP - Field and group assignments are to be taken from the 1965 COSATI Subject Category List. Since the ma-
        jority  of documents are multidisciptinary in nature, the Primary Field/Group assignment(s) will be specific discipline, area of human
        endeavor, or type of physical object. The application(s) will be cross-referenced with secondary Field/Group assignments that will follow
        the primary posting(s).

    18.  DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
        Denote releasability to the public or limitation for reasons other than security for example "Release Unlimited." Cite any availability to
        the public, with address and price.

    19. &20. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION
        DO NOT submit classified reports to the National Technical Information service.

    21.  NUMBER OF PAGES
        Insert the total number of pages, including this one and unnumbered pages, but exclude distribution list, if any.

    22.  PRICE
        Insert the price set by the National Technical Information Service or the Government Printing Office, if known.
                                                               SUS GOVERNMENT TOUTING OFFICE 1979 -281-147/31

EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73) (R«verM)

-------