Great
Lakes
National
Program
&EPA
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Great Lakes National Program Office (GLNPO)
Significant Activities Report
On the Web at:
www.epa.gov/greatlakes February-March 2006
IN THIS ISSUE:
• Toward Wildlife-Friendly
Wind Power
• Invaders May Change Chemistry
of the Great Lakes
• Kickoff Celebration for
Ashtabula River Cleanup
• Great Lakes Legacy Act Articles
• Paying It Forward:
Outreach by GLNPO Mentors
• Michigan AOC Summit III
• Air Emissions from Wax/Fibre
Firelogs
• Binational Toxics Strategy
Workgroup Meeting
• State of the Streams Presentation
• Great Lakes Watershed
Restoration Grants Awarded
• Fish Tumor Criteria Workshop
• View Ruddiman Creek Cleanup
Progress Online
• Canadian Emerging Chemicals
Workshop
Offshore wind turbines
(Photo courtesy of DOE Sandia National Laboratory)
Toward Wildlife-Friendly
Wind Power
The new U.S. Energy Bill incentives for al-
ternative energy development are set to ex-
pire at the end of 2007. This dadline, along
with the prevalence of high wind energy po-
tential areas, rapid advances in technology,
and lower equipment costs are all driving a
dramatic increase in wind energy farm pro-
posals. Many of the proposals coming for-
ward for development in and around Lake
Erie and the other Great Lakes are in areas of
high risk to wildlife. Impacts to wildlife and
habitat can occur through habitat loss - "foot
print", displacement, barrier effects, habitat
fragmentation, collision mortality, and cumu-
lative impacts. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife's
Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem Team along
with USEPA's GLNPO are in the process of
developing a resource tool box, and prepar-
ing to facilitate a conference June 27th to 29th
in Toledo, Ohio, entitled "Toward Wildlife-
Friendly Wind Power: A Focus on the Great
Lakes Basin." Additional information is
available on the Web at: http://www.fws.gov/
midwest/great! akes/windpower.htm.
-------
February-March 2006
Significant Activities Report
This proactive collaboration is in line with
principles of the State of the Lakes Ecosys-
tem Conference (SOLEC) to provide good
environmental information for sound deci-
sions, is supportive of the Lake Erie
Lakewide Management Plan ecosystem ob-
jectives, addresses the habitat/species and
sustainable development priorities of the
Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy
to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes, and
directly responds to the Government Ac-
countability Office's charge to Federal agen-
cies to assist the states to protect wildlife in
the development of wind energy.
(Richard Greenwood, USFWS Liaison,
GLNPO, 312-886-3853, green-
wood.richard@epa.gov)
Invaders May Change Chemistry of
the Great Lakes
Invasive zebra and quagga mussels may be
changing the chemistry of the Great Lakes in
an unanticipated way and this could have im-
portant consequences for the ecosystem, ac-
cording to a study published in an upcoming
issue (Post-dreissenid increases in transpar-
ency during summer stratification in the off-
shore waters of Lake Ontario: is a reduction
in whiting events the cause?32(1): 131-141)
of the Journal of Great Lakes Research.
New research conducted in Lake Ontario by
scientists from USEPA's Great Lakes Na-
tional Program Office, Canada's Department
of Fisheries and Oceans and Computer Sci-
ences Corp. suggests the mussels are making
offshore waters of the lake clearer during
summer months not by filtration as was pre-
viously thought, but by altering the chemistry
of the lake.
"Our study raises the possibility the lakes
may be affected by zebra and quagga mussels
in a way never previously demonstrated,"
A cluster of zebra mussels
said USEPA GLNPO's co-author Marc
Tuchman. The mussels are dramatically re-
ducing calcium in lake water by absorbing it
to make and maintain their shells, resulting in
the disappearance of "whiting events" and
rendering the water almost twice as clear dur-
ing summer months than before the mussels
invaded. This appears to be the first report of
an increase in transparency in lake water that
can reasonably be attributed to a chemical
change brought about by zebra and quagga
mussels.
This impact on water transparency could
have important consequences for the Great
Lakes ecosystem. For example, increased
light penetration of clearer water could in-
crease the amount of tiny plants living in the
water (phytoplankton) - particularly popula-
tions living at deeper depths - and substan-
tially change the biological balance between
living things in the lakes.
The scientists used data collected by EPA
and Environment Canada and the study was
funded by USEPA's Great Lakes National
Program Office.
(Contact: Marc Tuchman, 312-353-1369,
tuchman.marc@epa.gov)
Page 2
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
-------
Significant Activities Report
February-March 2006
Kickoff Celebration for Ashtabula
River Cleanup
The Ashtabula River Partnership sponsored a
"Kickoff Celebration for the Dredging of the
Ashtabula River" on March 29th. The Ashta-
bula River is scheduled for sediment cleanup
with funding from the Great Lakes Legacy
Act. A breakfast event was sponsored by the
Ashtabula River Partnership, the Growth
Partnership for Ashtabula County, Kent State
University of Ashtabula Campus, and the
local newspaper, the Star Beacon. Over 150
people attended the event. The co-chair of
the Ashtabula River Partnership, Fred Leitert
gave a brief overview of the history of the
project and thanked the many individuals in-
volved. USEPA GLNPO's Director, Gary
Gulezian, spoke about the importance of the
project and its larger context within the basin
and the positive impacts this cleanup will
have for the community. Bob Rule (project
manger for the non-federal sponsor) pre-
sented the nuts and bolts of the project, in-
cluding the schedule and when the dredging
is expected to begin.
To match the federal funding, the Ashtabula
City Port Authority will finance 50 percent
of the project costs in cooperation with other
public and private entities, including the
Ashtabula River Cooperation Group II, a
group of private companies. The state of
Ohio has provided $7 million for the project
and numerous other organizations, including
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, will play
an important role. The Ashtabula River
cleanup project is the largest one to date un-
der the Great Lakes Legacy Act of 2002 in
terms of scope and cost and is Ohio's first.
For more information about the Ashtabula
Legacy Act, surf over to: http://
www.epa.gov/glnpo/sediment/legacy/
ashtabula/index.html.
• •
THE OHIO DEPARTMEHT OF HEALTH
ADVISES AGAINST EATING FISH
CAUGHT IN THIS AREA
The primary goal of the Ashtabula cleanup project is
to eliminate the contamination causing warnings
against eating fish caught in the River and Harbor
(Contact: Scott Cieniawski, 312-353-9184,
cieniawski.scott@epa.gov)
Great Lakes Legacy Act Articles
The Journal of Civil Engineering published
an article about Great Lakes Legacy Act and
specifically the Black Lagoon Legacy Act
project (see attached PDF of the article). The
journal interviewed and quoted Marc
Tuchman for the story. The Illinois/Indiana
Sea Grant publication, The Helm, also fea-
tured a story on all of the GLLA projects and
specifically on some of the activities that
Susan Boehme, as the liaison to GLNPO has
been undertaking (http://www.iisgcp.org/
news/helm/helm.htm). Several articles have
appeared in local and regional newspapers
regarding the Ashtabula GLLA clean up,
spurred by a local kickoff event (see Ashta-
bula Growth Partnership write up).
(Contact: Susan Boehme, 312-353-4383,
boehme.susan@epa.gov)
Paying It Forward:
Outreach by GLNPO Mentors
On February 16th, GLNPO's GEM-SET men-
tors Elizabeth Hinchey Malloy, Jacqueline
Adams, and Christine McConaghy spoke to
high school students in the Math and Science
Club at Maria High School (Chicago, Illi-
nois) as part of the University of Illinois-
Chicago (UIC)'s Girls E-Mentoring in Sci-
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
Page3
-------
February-March 2006
Significant Activities Report
Great Lakes Areas of Concern
Great Lakes
Basin Boundary
• U.S.AOCs
• Canadian AOCs
A Binational AOCs
Delisted AOCs
The Great Lakes Areas of Concern (AOCs)
ence, Engineering and Technology (GEM-
SET) "meet and greet" mentor session. Their
seminar included an overview of Great Lakes
monitoring programs that GLNPO conducts
with the research vessels Lake Guardian and
Mudpuppy, a summary of the mentors' envi-
ronmental science backgrounds, and tips for
how high school students can find environ-
mental internships and other opportunities.
All students received a copy of the Great
Lakes Atlas. The seminar also served as an
announcement to students that Adams, who
will be sampling the Great Lakes as part of
the GLNPO spring survey in April, will be e-
mailing cruise updates to GEM-SET partici-
pants. High school students around the coun-
try will be able to follow the survey and see
pictures of Adams in action.
(Contacts: Jackie Adams, 312-353-7203, acU
ams.jacqueline@epa.gov; Christine
McConaghy, 312-886-6056, mccona-
ghy.christine@epa.gov ; or Beth Hinchey
Malloy, 312-886-3451, hin-
chey.elizabeth@epa.gov)
Michigan AOC Summit III
GLNPO Area of Concern (AOC) liaisons
met with Michigan AOC staff and AOC Pub-
lic Advisory Council (PAC) members at the
Area of Concern Summit III held in Kalama-
zoo, Michigan on February 2nd and 3rd. The
goal of the Summit was to further the
cleanup and delisting of the Michigan AOCs.
The Summit began with the Michigan De-
partment of Environmental Quality rolling
out its newly published Guidance for Delist-
ing Michigan's Great Lakes Areas of Con-
cern (http://www.deq.state.mi.us/documents/
Page 4
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
-------
Significant Activities Report
February-March 2006
deq-wb-aoc-delistguide.pdf). The Guidance
identifies specific criteria for each of the
fourteen Beneficial Use Impairments (BUIs)
which, if met, will allow that BUI to be con-
sidered restored. Once all BUIs affecting an
AOC have met the restoration criteria, the
Area of Concern can go through a process
leading to its delisting (removal from the list
of Great Lakes Areas of Concern).
Next came a panel discussion of potential
funding sources to aid in the development of
restoration plans for the "Loss of Fish and
Wildlife Habitat" and "Degradation of Fish
and Wildlife Populations" BUIs. According
to Michigan's Delisting Guidance, those
BUIs are considered restored once a site-
specific restoration plan has been prepared
and implemented. The panel consisted of
GLNPO, Michigan Department of Environ-
mental Quality, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Ser-
vice, Michigan Department of Natural Re-
sources, the National Fish and Wildlife
Foundation, and the Great Lakes Commis-
sion.
Then the Summit participants rolled up their
sleeves and joined working sessions broken
out by Area of Concern. That AOC's State,
federal, and citizen representatives discussed
the status of the Beneficial Use Impairments
(BUIs) affecting their AOC, identified the
remedial actions needed to remove the BUIs,
and identified the draft delisting criteria to
use for each BUI by applying the new Michi-
gan Delisting Guidance.
A summary of AOC Summit II is available
on the Web at: http://glc.org/spac/
proceedings/course-to-delisting.html.
(Contact: MarkElster, 312-886-3857, e^
ster.mark@epa.gov)
Logo of the Great American Woodstove Changeout
Campaign to encourage the purchase of lower-
emission EPA-certified woodstoves. Newer EPA-
certified woodstoves emit much less pollution than
older stoves. The Great Lakes Binational Toxics
Strategy endorses woodstove changeout campaigns
as a way to reduce emissions of toxic carcinogens
such as benzo(a)pyrene.
Air Emissions from Wax/Fibre
Firelogs
In a study funded by GLNPO, tests were
conducted to measure air pollutant emissions
from five different wax/fibre firelog brands
sold in the Great Lakes region of Canada and
the United States. This study was performed
because these artificial firelogs are becoming
more prevalent and applicable emission fac-
tors are not available. The tests measured air
emissions of particles, carbon monoxide, ni-
trogen oxides, formaldehyde, polycyclic aro-
matic hydrocarbons, including benzo(a)
pyrene, volatile organic compounds, and ben-
zene. In addition to the air emissions, the
wax and fibre used in each firelog brand
were characterized and the burning properties
were evaluated. According to the scientists
conducting the study, the commercially
available wax/fibre firelogs were reasonably
similar in their burning characteristics, air
emissions and the character of the residue left
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
PageS
-------
February-March 2006
Significant Activities Report
after burning and they produced significantly
lower emissions from their use in fireplaces
than did cordwood.
(Contact: Steve Rosenthal, 312-886-6052,
rosenthal.steven@epa.gov)
Binational Toxics Strategy
Workgroup Meeting
An Integration Workgroup Meeting of the
Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy was
held on February 16, 2006 in Windsor, On-
tario, Canada. Approximately fifty people
were in attendance from the US and Canada.
An agenda and power point presentation are
posted at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/bns/
integration/Feb2006/index.html. Major
agenda items included an update on Great
Lakes Regional Collaboration near term pro-
jects, a presentation by Dr. Lynn Katz-Chary
of the Northwest Indiana Toxics Action Pro-
ject on Green Chemistry Projects, a summary
of the State of the Lake Ecosystem Confer-
ence (SOLEC) Workshop on Chemical In-
tegrity held in Windsor in November 2005,
and the upcoming Great Lakes Water Quality
Agreement review.
(Contact: Ted Smith, 312-353-6571,
smith.edwin@epa.gov)
State of the Streams Presentation
On March 10th, USEPA GLNPO's Rose Elli-
son delivered the keynote address, "History
of the Watershed and Detroit River," at the
second annual State of the Streams Work-
shop for Detroit River tributaries. The event
was hosted by the Stream Team, a group of
educators and volunteers interested in local
water quality issues.
(Contact: Rosanne Ellison, 734-692-7689,
elli son. rosanne@epa. gov)
The Detroit River showing Rouge River at top left and
northern end of Fighting Island at bottom
(Photo courtesy of NOAA)
Great Lakes Watershed Restoration
Grants Awarded
On Great Lakes Day (March 16th) in Wash-
ington DC, USEPA's GLNPO, in partnership
with the National Fish and Wildlife Founda-
tion, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,
U.S. Forest Service, and the U.S. Department
of Agriculture Natural Resources Conserva-
tion Service, announced funding for 14 pro-
jects through the Great Lakes Watershed
Restoration Grant Program. With $827,400
coming from federal dollars, the projects
were able to leverage more than $1.4 million
in non-federal contributions from partners.
The projects will address the needs identified
by the Great Lakes Regional Collaboration
Strategy to Restore and Protect the Great
Lakes.
Grant recipients in Minnesota, Wisconsin,
Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and New York in-
clude non-profit organizations, state and lo-
cal governments, a conservation district and
an academic institution. The funds will be
used to develop and implement local water-
Page 6
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
-------
Significant Activities Report
February-March 2006
shed plans that address water quality and liv-
ing resource needs in Great Lakes water-
sheds. Project activities will help restore
critical sand dune, wetland, forest, and
stream habitats for fish and wildlife as well
as control invasive plant species. Four of the
project sites are located in Areas of Concern
and eight projects are located in areas identi-
fied by The Nature Conservancy's Conserva-
tion Blueprint for the Great Lakes as high
priority landscapes and water habitats that, if
conserved, promise to ensure biodiversity
over the long term.
The 2006 awardees of the Great Lakes Wa-
tershed Grant Program are:
• Portage Lakefront Habitat Restoration:
Portage Indiana Parks Department
• Chiwaukee Prairie State Natural Area
Restoration: Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources
• Southeast MI Headwaters Restoration:
The Nature Conservancy, Michigan
• Johnson Creek Watershed Management
Plan: Charter Township of Northville,
Michigan
• Habitat Restoration and Quality Assess-
ment in Ozaukee and Washington Coun-
ties: Ozaukee Washington Land Trust,
Inc., Wisconsin
• Implementation Strategies of Priority
Watershed in Lake Superior Basin: Min-
nesota Pollution Control Agency
• West Creek Reservation, Wetlands Com-
munity Ecological Restoration: Cleve-
land Metroparks, Ohio
• Milwaukee River Mainstem Riparian
Plan Community Restoration: River Re-
vitalization Foundation, Wisconsin
• Westfield Water Supply Diversion Dam:
New York Rivers United
• Hersey River Restoration and Dam Re-
moval Project: Muskegon River Water-
shed Assembly, Michigan
• Restoring Fish Passage in Bad River Wa-
tershed Culverts: Northland College,
Wisconsin
• Thornapple River Watershed Plan: Barry
Conservation District, Michigan
• Broken Sword Stream Improvement:
Sandusky River Watershed Coalition,
Ohio
• Black River Watershed Plan: New York
State Tug Hill Commission
The federal agencies and National Fish and
Wildlife Foundation are reviewing the final
Great Lakes Regional Collaboration Strategy
to Restore and Protect the Great Lakes. The
next Great Lakes Watershed Restoration
Grant Program Request for Proposals will be
based on that review. That request for pro-
posals is expected to be announced in Sep-
tember 2006. The amount of funding that
will be available has not yet been finalized.
(Karen Rodriguez, 312-353-2690, Rodri-
guez.karen@epa.gov)
Fish Tumor Criteria Workshop
A fish tumor criteria workshop was held in
Columbus, Ohio March 28th and 29th by the
Ohio State University (Dr. Paul Baumann)
funded by a grant from GLNPO. About 25
people were in attendance, ranging from pa-
thologists to representatives from various
Bullhead with the kind of tumors that have been
associated with sediment contamination
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
Page 7
-------
February-March 2006
Significant Activities Report
Areas of Concern throughout the Great
Lakes. The purpose of the workshop was to
support the development of delisting criteria
for the fish tumor beneficial use impairment
at Great Lakes Areas of Concern. The fish
tumor beneficial use impairment affects
about half of the Great Lakes Areas of Con-
cern. Data was presented on the prevalence
of tumors in fish (mostly brown bullheads) in
the Great Lakes as well as tumor pathology.
Scott Ireland of GLNPO attended and gave
an overview presentation on the development
of delisting target development for Great
Lakes Areas of Concern. The workshop re-
sulted in the decision to pursue a lake-wide
(i.e., Lake Erie, Lake Michigan, etc.) refer-
ence condition for fish tumors in brown bull-
heads. Dr. Baumann will be working with
several others from the workshop to pull data
together that meet the minimum criteria and
then to make a determination of additional
data needs.
(Contact: Scott Ireland, 312-886-8121, ire-
land, scott@epa.gov)
View Ruddiman Creek Cleanup
Progress Online
Track cleanup progress at the Ruddiman
Creek Great Lakes Legacy Act sediment
cleanup online at: http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/
sediment/legacy/ruddiman/index.html. Here
you can see the weekly sediment dredging
totals as the project progresses. This is the
first site where we have shown weekly up-
100,000
» 'g 75,000
!s o
>E
£ £ 50,000
~:g 25,000-
Graph showing progress of Ruddiman Creek Great
Lakes Legacy Act sediment cleanup available online
dated dredging totals and we plan to do this
for future sites. Any comments about how we
might show progress more graphically are
welcome.
(Contact: Susan Boehme, 312-353-4383,
boehme.susan@epa.gov)
Canadian Emerging Chemicals
Workshop
USEPA GLNPO's Ted Smith gave a presen-
tation on U.S. chemical control and screening
programs at a joint Canada-Ontario work-
shop, "Identifying and Developing Strategies
for Canada's and Ontario's Response to
Emerging Substances in the Great Lakes Ba-
sin" held on March 7th and 8th in Toronto,
Ontario, Canada. The purpose of the work-
shop was threefold, to:
1. Share knowledge regarding the research,
assessment and management of emerging
substances;
2. Identify challenges and data gaps; and,
3. Discuss potential strategies and ap-
proaches that could inform future work
under the Canada-Ontario Agreement.
Approximately 100 people attended the
workshop, including representatives from the
Ontario Ministry of Environment, Environ-
ment Canada, Health Canada, Ontario Minis-
try of Health and Long-Term Care, Ontario
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Af-
fairs and other non-governmental organiza-
tions. The workshop was co-sponsored by
Environment Canada and the Ontario Minis-
try of the Environment.
Priorities coming out of the workshop re-
garding emerging hazardous substances in-
cluded the following:
• Establish a "watch list" and task force for
priority and emerging substances
• Improve the link to public health
• Learn from international best practices
PageS
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
-------
Significant Activities Report
February-March 2006
(e.g. Nordic countries and Europe)
• Collaborate on research between govern-
ment, industry, international researchers
(collaboration between various levels of
governments as well)
• Set practical commitments and specific
targets (set commitments and targets with
regulations
• Promote investment and industry incen-
tives to find "safer" alternatives
• Promote research and monitoring pro-
grams, innovation (Green chemistry)
• COA should be strengthened - should be
a unified body with a vision, requires
more national and provincial significance
(Contact: Ted Smith, 312-353-6571,
smith.edwin@epa.gov)
Upcoming Events
2006
May 17-18 Great Lakes Binational
Toxics Strategy Stake-
holders Meeting,
Toronto, Ontario Canada
May 22-26 IAGLR 49th Annual Con-
ference on Great Lakes Re-
search, Windsor, Ontario
Canada
June 27-29 Toward Wildlife-Friendly
Wind Power: A Focus on
the Great Lakes Basin
Toledo, Ohio
October 11-13 Second International Sym-
posium on the Lake Huron
Ecosystem, Honey Harbor,
Ontario Canada
November 1-3
State of the Lakes Ecosys-
tem Conference
(SOLEC) 2006
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
We welcome your questions, comments or
suggestions about this month's Significant
Activities Report. To be added to or re-
moved from the Email distribution of the
Significant Activities Report, please contact
Tony Kizlauskas, 312-353-8773,
kizlauskas.anthony@epa.gov.
U.S. EPA Great Lakes National Program Office
Page 9
------- |