LAKE ERIE
LAKEWTDE
MANAGEMENT
PLAN
Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan (LaMP)
Technical Report Series
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for
Assessing Pollutants of Concern to Lake Erie
Scott Painter, Donna N. Myers, and Julie Letterhos
June 23,2000
Lake Erie LaMP Technical Report
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Note to the Reader
This technical report was prepared as part of Stage 1, or the problem
definition stage, of the Lake Erie Lakewide Management Plan. The
report provides detailed technical and background information that
characterizes pollutant sources, water quality data, and water quality
data-collection programs. These data were evaluated for their
potential use in characterizing concentrations and loads of pollutants
that impair beneficial uses in the Lake Erie basin.
ii
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Contents
List of Figures iv
List of Tables v
Conversion Factors and Abbreviations m
Acronyms vii
Acknowledgments viii
Summary ix
Introduction 1
Characterization of Sources and Source Data 5
Point Sources Discharging to Surface Water 5
Domestic Wastewater 5
Industrial Wastewater 8
Stormwater and Sewer Overflows 13
Point Source Discharge or Release Data 15
Toxics Emission Data 18
Nonpoint Sources 25
Agriculture 26
Abandoned Solid Waste and Hazardous Waste Landfills 29
Water Quality and Ancillary Data 31
Water Quality Data for Lake Erie, the Connecting Channels, and Tributaries 31
Aquatic Sediments 39
Fish Tissue 43
Precipitation and Dry Deposition 43
Pathways 44
Suitability of Available Data 47
Conclusions and Future Direction 49
References 53
Appendix A. Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals 57
Appendix B. Data Screening Procedure and Selection Criteria 59
in
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
List of Figures
Figure 1. Lake Erie and its watershed, United States and Canada 2
Figure 2. Location and range of average flows of sewage treatment plants in the Lake Erie Basin 6
Figure 3. Locations of primary metal, fabricated metal, and transportation facilities in the Lake Erie Basin 9
Figure 4. Locations of petroleum and chemical facilities in the Lake Erie Basin 10
Figure 5. Locations of paper facilities in the Lake Erie Basin 11
Figure 6. Locations of electric, gas, and sanitary service facilities in the Lake Erie Basin 12
Figure 7. Suspected endocrine-disrupting chemical releases, from the 1996 TRI and NPRI 13
Figure 8. Locations of facilities that have regulated discharges in the Lake Erie Basin 16
Figure9. Facilities that monitor for benzo(a)pyrene in the Lake Erie Basin 20
Figure 10. Facilities that monitor for mercury in the Lake Erie Basin 21
Figure 11. FacilitiesthatmonitorforPCBsintheLakeErieBasin 22
Figure 12. Facilities that monitor for total phosphorus in the Lake Erie Basin 23
Figure 13. 1993 atrazine use in Great Lakes Region 27
Figure 14. Atrazine concentrations in the lower lakes: 1992-1993 27
Figure 15. Suspected endocrine-disrupting chemicals used in agriculture in 1993 28
Figure 16. Frequency of observations of benzo(a)pyrene in surface waters of the Lake Erie basin,
United States: 1986-1996 35
Figure 17. Frequency of observations of mercury in surface waters of the Lake Erie basin, United States:
1986-1996 36
Figure 18. Geometric mean concentrations of total phosphorus in the Lake Erie basin compared to selected
guidelines established for streams and Lake Erie: 1986-1996 37
Figure 19. Geometric mean nitrate-nitrogen concentrations in surface waters of the Lake Erie basin,
Canada and the United States: 1986-1996 38
Figure 20. Single-sample concentrations of total PCBs in aquatic sediments of the Lake Erie basin in relation to the
Probable Effect Level of0.277 mg/kg: 1990-1997 41
Figure 21. Single-sample concentrations of mercury in aquatic sediments of the Lake Erie basin in relation to the
Probable EffectLevel of0.486 mg/kg: 1990-1997 42
IV
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
List of Tables
Table 1. Beneficial use impairments in the Lake Erie basin 3
Table 2. Pollutants identified for analysis of sources and loads in the Lake Erie LaMP 4
Table 3. Reported concentration ranges of selected Lake Erie pollutants of concern in sewage
effluent and sludge 8
Table 4. Concentration ranges of selected Lake Erie pollutants of concern in storm water 14
Table5. Required minimum analytical detection limits reported in SRDS and PCS databases 17
Table 6. Pollutant class, pollutant, number of reporting facilities, number of observations, and percent of
samples reported above the detection limit, Lake Erie basin in the United States: 1986-1997 18
Table 7. Pollutant class, pollutant, number of reporting facilities, number of observations, and percent of
samples reported above the detection limit, Lake Erie basin in Ontario: 1995 19
Table8. Lake Erie LaMP pollutants of concern reported in the TRI and NPRI inventories, 1996 24
Table 9. Total releases of chemicals in eight Great Lakes states and Ontario, from the 1996 TRI and NPRI
databases 24
Table 10. Top 25 chemicals released into the environment in 1996 reported in TRI (total for eight
Great Lakes states) 25
Table 11. The top 25 chemicals released into the environment in 1996 reported in NPRI (total for Ontario) 25
Table 12. Pollutants of concern regulated by RCRA for the Lake Erie basin 29
Table 13. Number of municipal solid waste landfills; RCRA Treatment, Storage and Disposal sites; CERCLA
sites; and National Priority List sites in five Great Lake states 30
Table 14. Quantity of selected Lake Erie pollutants of concern transferred to landfills, 1996 30
Table 15. Pollutant class, pollutant, percentage of samples with detected concentrations, number of samples,
number of sites, and number of sites within indicated range of samples per site, Lake Erie basin
tributaries in the United States: 1986-1996 33
Table 16. Pollutant class, pollutant, percentage of samples with detected concentrations, number of samples,
number of sites, and number of sites within indicated range of samples per site, Lake Erie basin
tributaries in Ontario: 1986-1996 34
Table 17. Dissolved- and particulate-phase pollutants, number of samples, percentage of samples with detected
concentrations, detection limits, and number of samples per site; St. Clair River and Niagara River
at Fort Erie sampling sites: 1990-1996 34
Table 18. Number of samples and detection frequency of selected pollutants of concern in near surface
sediments:LakeEriebasinintheUnitedStates: 1990-1997 40
Table 19. Summary of National Sediment Inventory data for selected pollutants in fish tissue by pollutant
class, pollutant, number of tissue samples, and median concentration: 1980-1993 43
Table 20. Summary of available IADN data by pollutant and phase, Lake Erie at Sturgeon Point, New York: 1993 45
v
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP —
Conversion Factors and Abbreviations
Multiply By To Obtain
Inch (in)
25.4
Millimeter (mm)
Foot (ft)
0.3048
Meter (m)
Mile (mi)
1.609
Kilometer (km)
Square foot (ft2)
0.0929
Square meter (m2)
Square mile (mi2)
2.59
Square kilometer (km2)
Acre
0.4047
Square hectometer (hectare)
Pound (lb)
0.000454
Metric ton
Ton
0.9072
Metric ton
Acre-foot (acre-ft)
1,234.3
Cubic meter (m3)
Cubic feet per second (cfs)
0.02832
Cubic meters per second
Gallons per minute (gal/min)
3.785
Liters per minute
Million gallons per day (Mgal/d)
3,743.06
Cubic meters per day
Temperatures are given in degrees Fahrenheit (°F), which can be converted to degrees Celsius (°C) by use of the
following equation: °C = (°F - 32)/1.8
Water temperatures are given in degrees Celsius.
Abbreviated Environmental Concentrations
Chemical concentrations are given in metric units. The units commonly used are milligrams (one-thousandth
gram) per liter (mg/L), micrograms (one-millionth gram) per liter (mg/L), nanograms (one-billionth gram) per
liter (ng/L), milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg), micrograms per kilogram (mg/kg), and picograms (one-
trillionth gram) per cubic meter (pg/m3). These units express the concentration of chemical constituents as
weight (milligrams, micrograms, nanograms, or picograms) of constituent per unit volume of water or air
(liter or cubic meter) or per unit mass of sediment or biological tissue (kilogram).
VI
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Acronyms
AOC
Area of Concern
BCC
Bioaccumulative Chemical of Concern
BOD
Biochemical oxygen demand
CERCLA
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
COA
Canada-Ontario Agreement
COD
Chemical oxygen demand
CSO
Combined sewer overflow
DDT
1,1,1 -trichloro-2,2-bis(p-chlorophenyl ethane)
DMR
Discharge Monitoring Report
EDC
Endocrine-Disrupting Chemical
EDS
Effluent Data Statistics
ENVIRODAT
Connecting channel database
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
FIELDS
Fully Integrated Environmental Locational Decision Support System
GLWQA
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
IADN
Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network
IJC
International Joint Commission
LaMP
Lakewide Management Plan
MDN
Mercury Deposition Network
MISA
Municipal-Industrial Strategy for Abatement
MOE
Ontario Ministry of Environment
MSWLF
Municipal solid waste landfill
NADP/NTN
National Atmospheric Deposition Program/National Trends Network
NOAA
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPDES
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPL
National Priorities List
NPRI
National Pollutant Release Inventory
NSI
National Sediment Inventory
OSI
Ohio Sediment Inventory
PAH
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
PCBs
Polychlorinated biphenyls
PCS
Permit Compliance System
PWQMN
Provincial Water Quality Monitoring Network
RAP
Remedial Action Plan
RAPIDS
Regional Air Pollution Inventory Database System
RCRA
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
SIC
Standard Industrial Classification
SRDS
Sample Results Data Store
SSO
Sanitary sewer overflow
STAR
Storage and Retrieval System-Environment Canada
STORET
Storage and Retrieval System-EPA
STP
Sewage treatment plant
TRI
Toxics Release Inventory
USACE
United States Army Corps of Engineers
USGS
United States Geological Survey
WWTP
Wastewater treatment plant
VII
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Acknowledgments
I I-- In- I ihil I viewers
Sources and Loadings Subcommittee
Seth Ausubel, USEPA Region 2
Fred Fleischer, Ontario Ministry of Environment
Robert Townsend, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Alan Waffle, Environment Canada
Work Group
Kelly Burch, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
Lauren Lambert, Ohio Environmental Protection Agency
Peter Roberts, Ontario Ministry of Agriculture
Robert Townsend, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
Public Forum Reviewers
Sources and Loadings Task Group
Outside Reviewers
Jonathan Barney, USEPA Region 5
Jiri Marsalek, Environment Canada
VIII
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Summary
Many pollutants arising from past and present
agricultural, industrial, and municipal sources are
impairing or could impair the beneficial uses of Lake
Erie. This report focuses on concentration and
loadings information for selected pollutants that are
or might be affecting fish, other aquatic life, human
health, and ecosystem function. Particular emphasis
was placed on analyzing data for poly chlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) and mercury. These two pollut-
ants are associated with widespread fish consump-
tion advisories in the basin. Fish consumption
advisories are issued to protect human health from
the risks associated with ingesting pollutants in fish
tissue. The advisories represent an impairment of a
beneficial use of the water resources of Lake Erie.
Because of widespread fish consumption advi-
sories, mercury and PCBs have been designated
as critical pollutants in the Lake Erie Lakewide
Management Plan (LaMP).
The information presented in this report includes the
physical location of municipal, industrial, and
agricultural activities and estimated chemical re-
leases and emissions from these sources. The report
also provides data on the concentrations of selected
pollutants in tributaries, connecting channels, Lake
Erie, aquatic sediments, fish tissue, and atmospheric
deposition. A thorough examination of environmen-
tal data for point and nonpoint sources, streams,
connecting channels, Lake Erie, aquatic sediments,
fish, and the atmosphere will provide an under-
standing of useful data, data gaps, and data limita-
tions for assessing concentrations or loadings.
This report lays the groundwork for establishing the
relationship between sources and environmental
concentrations and loadings. Concentrations in the
environment often reflect proximity to sources,
particularly for those pollutants for which local
sources are significant relative to long-range trans-
port. Data examined for this report suggest that
environmental sources and environmental concen-
trations of PCBs, mercury, polynuclear aromatic
hydrocarbons, selected pesticides, and nutrients
(atrazine, nitrate-nitrogen, and total phosphorus) are
closely related geographically. These pollutants are
detected in concentrations that are elevated above
recommended levels in various parts of the aquatic
system-in water, in aquatic sediment, in fish, and in
the atmosphere. The data further point to the
conclusion that the Lake Erie basin as a whole, and
in particular the western portion, is a stressed
environment. Concentrations of mercury and PCBs
in aquatic sediments in the western portion of the
basin are frequently found at levels associated with
probable adverse effects on aquatic life.
Of all the Great Lakes, Lake Erie receives the
greatest amount of domestic wastewater, total-
ing more than 7,355,000 cubic meters per day.
That amount is equivalent to the amount re-
ceived by several of the lake's major tributaries.
Sewage treatment plants (STPs) are the source
of most of the domestic wastewater and repre-
sent a potentially important source of pollutants.
Typical concentrations of PCBs reported in
effluents from STPs across North America range
from 0.005 to 0.055 |lg/L. Although equivalent
data are lacking for the Lake Erie basin, suspected
endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and phar-
maceuticals have been reported in municipal
effluents from STPs elsewhere. But STPs also
represent a significant line of defense against the
discharge of pollutants to the environment. The
larger STPs are designed to remove about 90
percent or more of the phosphorus, as required by
the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. From
studies elsewhere in North America, PCB removal
efficiencies of STPs can be as high as 97 percent.
The industrial pretreatment program in the United
States and the municipal sewer-use bylaws in
Ontario contribute significantly to minimizing the
inputs of pollutants to STPs and the outputs from
STPs to receiving waters.
IX
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Air emissions are an important source of certain
critical pollutants, such as PCBs and mercury,
that are delivered to Lake Erie through atmo-
spheric deposition. Because of long-range
transport by the atmosphere, there is a need to
consider areas beyond the Lake Erie basin as
possible source areas. In 1996 most of the
mercury and PCB releases in the Lake Erie
basin reported by the United States through the
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) database and the
mercury releases reported by Canada through
the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI)
database were to the atmosphere.
As a percentage of total land use, agricultural
and urban land uses within the Lake Erie basin
are the highest in the Great Lakes basin. Most
fertilizers, sediment, and pesticides are dis-
charged to surface waters from nonpoint sources
associated with urban and agricultural land use
and chemical use. Atrazine and metolachlor are
the pesticides used in greatest quantities in the
basin, and surface water concentrations reflect
their application to row crops. Some agricultural
pesticides are suspected EDCs. Several of these
suspected EDCs are used in agriculture in the
basin, in the upper Midwest, and in areas adja-
cent to and upwind from Lake Erie.
Available environmental emissions data from
point sources and ambient data from tributaries,
Lake Erie, connecting channels, sediments, fish
tissue, and the atmosphere were obtained and
aggregated from databases of monitoring pro-
grams designed to describe concentrations and
loads. Fourteen major environmental databases
representing contributions from 10 national, 10
state and provincial, four binational, and two
nongovernmental monitoring programs were
examined. Databases evaluated for the United
States were STORET, PCS, TRI, OSI, FIELDS,
NSI, and USGS. Databases evaluated for Canada
were STAR, ENVIRODAT, PWQMN, SRDS,
and NPRI. Binational networks evaluated were
IADN and MDN.
The results of the analysis of these data collected
from 1986 to 1997 indicate that available concen-
tration data for PCBs, organochlorine pesticides,
mercury, and polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon
compounds in effluents and surface waters might
not be suitable to describe the occurrence and
distribution of concentrations or to compute loads.
One reason is that the detection limits for concen-
trations of PCBs, organochlorine pesticides,
polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, and mercury
reported by monitoring programs in the United
States and Ontario often are too high to measure
the relatively low concentrations of these pollutants
found in discharges and in surface waters. PCB
concentrations were monitored and reported at 15
facilities in the United States, but only 5 percent of
the nearly 1,000 observations were reported above
the detection limit. Mercury concentrations were
monitored and reported at 21 facilities in Ontario in
1995, but like PCBs, the percentage of observa-
tions above the detection limit was too low to
assess concentrations and loads. In the United
States, 170 point sources reported mercury con-
centrations, but only 23 percent of the reported
observations were above detection limits. Likewise,
data for organochlorine compounds, polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbon compounds, and mercury
reported by monitoring programs for tributaries in
the United States and Ontario-in particular, for
mercury and PCBs-did not meet the minimum
criteria to characterize concentrations and loads to
Lake Erie. Only the atmospheric data from the
Integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network were
sufficient to estimate loads for trace organics,
including PCBs. Data from 1995 to 1998 that
are suitable for the computation of mercury
deposition from the atmosphere are available
from the Mercury Deposition Network (MDN).
Conversely, a large number of samples were
collected, analyzed, and reported from many point
sources, tributaries, connecting channels, and Lake
Erie for total phosphorus, nitrate-nitrogen, and total
nonfilterable residue or suspended sediment. Data
reported from greater than 90 percent of these
x
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
samples were well above the detection limits.
Basinwide characterizations of concentrations of
nitrate-nitrogen, total phosphorus, and total
nonfilterable residue in effluents, tributaries, con-
necting channels, and Lake Erie appear to be
possible. Nutrient data for surface waters are
potentially suitable to characterize loads.
Although environmental data from point sources and
surface waters for most trace organic sub stances were
not suitable for characterizing concentrations or
computing loads, other available data may be used in
their place for some types of analyses. Near-surface
streambed and lakebed sediments can indicate the
recent deposition or resuspension of pollutants to the
aquatic environment. Fish tissue can help integrate the
bioaccumulation of pollutants by aquatic life and the
potential for human health impacts. The detection
frequency of organochlorine and trace metal pollutants
in aquatic sediments is markedly higher than in water
or effluents. Pollutants such as PCBs, organochlorine
pesticides, polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons, and
mercury that are reported with few or no detections in
point source effluents and surface waters are reported
at concentrations above detection limits at frequencies
of 25 percent or more in aquatic sediments. Bed
sediment concentration data examined from 1990
to1997 for the United States and for 1997 by
Environment Canada suggest that at many sites in
the basin, concentrations of PCBs and mercury in
aquatic sediments exceed guidelines associated
with potential adverse effects on aquatic life.
The next step is to further characterize and track
sources. With source-tracking information, a
scientific basis for sound management decisions
to reduce or eliminate these sources can be
formulated. Many point sources can be identified
from the data compiled for this report. Maps of
discharge locations, pesticide use, agricultural areas,
abandoned landfill sites, and other land uses will be
compared to tributary, connecting channel, and lake
concentrations, fish tissue concentrations, and aquatic
sediment concentrations to identify maj or source areas
and the most highly contaminated areas in the basin.
Whether the most contaminated areas and major
sources already have been targeted for priority
action may be assessed by identifying and cross-
referencing implementation and remediation
actions already under way. The Lake Erie Areas
of Concern have been previously identified as
priority areas for source control and
remediation. Analyses done to compare the
magnitude and extent of contamination in
Remedial Action Plan (RAP) areas, can also
point out where further action or attention may
be needed, whether it be monitoring, additional
research, or remediation.
Several efforts independent of the Lake Erie LaMP
that may contribute to further identification and
remediation of sources are under way. The
Binational USEPA/Environment Canada Toxics
Reduction Strategy is investigating sources of
pollutants of concern to the Great Lakes both within
and outside the basin. Several contaminated sedi-
ment and landfill remediation proj ects recently were
completed or are under way in the River Raisin,
Ashtabula River, and Ottawa River/Maumee Areas
of Concern. Another ongoing proj ect of the LaMP is
the review of the status of government agency pro-
grams for pollution prevention and reduction activities
throughout the Lake Erie basin, particularly for
mercury and PCBs.
Lake Erie is continuously changing as a result of
declines in phosphorus loads, management of
toxic pollutants, and the introduction and estab-
lishment of exotic species. To better understand
pathways of critical pollutants, additional
research is needed on changes in food web dynam-
ics and the linkages in energy and flow between the
lake bottom and the water column. For example,
concentrations in fish have fluctuated over the years,
even as loads from the land surface and from point
source discharges appear to have decreased. This
finding demonstrates that it is important to under-
stand what is happening to the pollutants already in
the lake.
XI
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
An analysis must be done of the ambient concentra-
tions of critical pollutants in all media compared to
the obj ectives of Annex 1 of the Great Lakes Water
Quality Agreement. Such an analysis would include
an assessment of the potential of certain pollutants
to cause impairment and would ensure a thorough
evaluation of the links between sources of pollutants
and the response of the Lake Erie system to these
pollutants. Selected data examined for this report
could be used for these purposes and to identify the
areas in greatest need of restoration.
xn
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Introduction
From the perspective of reducing the presence
of persistent toxic substances in Lake Erie, the
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement
(GLWQA) suggests that the Problem Definition
stage analysis of the Lakewide Management
Plan (LaMP) should include the following:
• A definition of the threat posed by critical
pollutants to human health or aquatic life,
singly or in synergistic or additive combina-
tions with other substances, including their
contribution to the impairment of beneficial uses.
• An evaluation of information available on
concentrations, sources, and pathways of the
critical pollutants in the Great Lakes system,
including all information on loadings of the
critical pollutants from all sources and an estima-
tion of total loadings of the critical pollutants
by modeling or other identified methods.
• Development of information necessary to
determine the schedule of load reductions of
critical pollutants that would result in
meeting Agreement objectives, pursuant to
Article VI of the Agreement and including
steps to develop the necessary standard
approaches and agreed procedures.
As a preliminary step to meeting these require-
ments, the Sources and Loads Subcommittee
(Subcommittee) of the Lake Erie LaMP Work
Group was charged with the following:
• Describe the status and trends in concentra-
tions and loads of pollutants that are caus-
ing, or have the potential to cause,
beneficial use impairments in Lake Erie.
• Identify the major sources and the relative
contribution of those sources to the benefi-
cial use impairments.
• Provide a scientific basis for sound manage-
ment decisions for reducing, removing, and
eliminating the pollutants from the Lake
Erie system.
• Identify gaps in the information needed
to identify the sources and loads, and recom-
mend the monitoring needed to fill the gaps.
This report presents a summary of the data avail-
able to address the above charge and provides an
assessment of data suitable for developing loading
estimates. The potential sources are categorized as
either point or nonpoint, and generic descriptions of
size, location, and available data by sector are pre-
sented. Ambient environmental data, such as concen-
trations of pollutants in sediment and fish tissue, are
briefly described and will be evaluated more fully
in the next phase of this project. This assessment
covers the entire Lake Erie basin (Figure 1).
The initial list of chemicals selected for review
was identified in the beneficial use impairment
assessment reports. The chemicals are presented
in Table 1 with a summary of conclusions
describing impairment in Lake Erie. Of these
chemicals, the Lake Erie LaMP Management
Committee has designated mercury and PCBs as
critical pollutants for priority action.
The Subcommittee developed a list of pollutants
and their degradation products designated by a
variety of agency programs as being pollutants
of concern throughout the Lake Erie basin (Table 2).
These pollutants include those listed in Table 1,
as well as those with the potential to impair
beneficial uses in Lake Erie. This expanded list
allows the Subcommittee to begin evaluating
information on all pollutants of concern in Lake
Erie and to determine the suitability of the data
for estimating loads. This report also identifies
whether the available data represent a pollutant
source or pathway to the Lake Erie ecosystem.
This report presents a detailed analysis of the
information available in various databases. It
provides an overall view of the Lake Erie basin,
highlighting areas where most of the sources are
located. It also provides a starting point for the next
phase of the process-tracking down the sources.
1
-------
ro
(Q
E
CD
^T
CD
CD
=>
< i
CD
35
ZT
CD
Q.
CD
Q_
c/>
a I
fi>
< I
CD
(/)
o
3
Q.
Ontario
Kitchener/
V\todst<
Lorai n-Elyri
a ClairR.
Scale 1:2,030,000
30 0 30 20 30 40 Mies
Biffalo
/\/ International Boundary
/\./ State/^a/i nee Boundary
Streams
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
o
IE
>
TO
%
E5
rsi
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
"D
ZO
O
o
XI
>
o
>
7s
>
s
"O
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 1. Beneficial use impairments in the Lake Erie basin.
BUI
Causes of Impairment
Impairment Conclusions9
Fish and Wildlife
Consumption
Restrictions
Fish- PCBs, mercury, lead,
chlordane, and dioxins
Wildlife- PCBs, chlordane,
DDE, DDT, and mirex
Impaired for fish
Inconclusive for wildlife
Restrictions on
Dredging Activities
PCBs and heavy metals
Impaired
Eutrophication or
Undesirable Algae
Phosphorus
Impaired in Maumee Bay and lake-effect zones of
the Maumee and Ottawa Rivers in Ohio
Potentially Impaired in lake-effect zones of the
Toussaint, Portage, and Sandusky rivers and Turtle
and Muddy creeks in Ohio
Potentially Impaired in lake-effect zones of Old
Woman Creek and Vermillion, Rocky Huron, Black,
Chagrin, and Cuyahoga rivers in Ohio
Rondeau Bay, Ontario, 1998-1999 sampling results
are expected to provide data for conclusive
determination of impairment in the nearshore and
river mouths in Ontario.
Recreational Water
Quality Impairment
Violations of PAHs,b
Escherichia coli, or fecal
coliform standards
Impaired
'When a beneficial use impairment is noted for a particular basin, the impairment is occurring somewhere within that basin, not
necessarily throughout the entire basin. Details about the location and extent of impairment, where known, are provided in the technical
reports (available on request) that support this summary.
bPAHs are the basis for a human contact advisory in the Black River, Ohio, Area of Concern but are not the basis for a fish consumption
advisory. The human contact advisory issued by the Ohio Department of Health indicates that it is not safe to go into the water in this
area.
3
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 2. Pollutants identified for analysis of sources and loads in the Lake Erie LaMP.
Pollutant(s)a
Common Source(s)
Organochlorine insecticides and biocides
DDTcd"h
Historical use on crops, trace in dicofol.
• DDD, DDE
ChlordanebdB"
Historical use on crops and for termite and ant control.
• a-chlordane, y-chlordane, cis-nonachlor,
trans-nonachlor
Dieldrin"6"
Historical use on crops, termite and moth control.
ToxapheneccU'h
Historical use on crops, topical insecticide.
MirexLde,h
• Photomirex
Historical use for fire ant control and flame retardant.
a-hexachlorocyclohexanecde
Agricultural and topical insecticides.
p-hexachlorocyclohexanecde
8-hexachlorocyclohexanecde
y-hexachlorocyclohexanecde
Industrial organochlorine compounds or by-products
PCBs
Transformers, hydraulic fluids, capacitors, heat transfer fluids,
inks, casting waxes.
Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD)defh
Combustion byproducts, in pentachlorophenol wood
preservative, other chlorophenols and derivatives, including
herbicides.
1,4-dichlorobenzened 8
Mothballs, household deodorants, other biocides.
Pentachlorobenzene"8
Chemical synthesis.
1,2,3,4-tetrachlorobenzenede
1,2,3,5-tetrachlorobenzenede
Pentachlorophenol"8
Chloroalkali plants, wood preservatives.
Hexachlorobenzenedeh
Byproduct of chemical manufacturing, historical wood
preservative and fungicide.
3,3'- Dichlorobenzidinede
Plastic manufacturing, glues and adhesives, dyes and pigments
for printing inks.
4,4'-Methylenebis(2-chloroaniline)de
Plastics, adhesives.
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)de
Anthracene; Benz(a)anthracene
Coal, oil, gas, and coking byproducts, waste incineration, wood
Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene
and tobacco smoke, and forest fires, engine exhaust, asphalt
Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
tars and tar products.
Chrysene, Fluoranthene, Phenanthrene
lndeno( 123-cd)pyrene
Trace Metals
Alkyl leaddRf
Leaded gasoline.
Cadmium4"
Batteries, pigments, metal coatings, plastics, mining, coal
burning, metal alloys, rubber, dye, steel production.
Copper'
Same as cadmium, plus plumbing and wiring.
Lead
Same as cadmium, plus solder.
Zinc'
Same as cadmium, plus roofing.
MercuryLdef
Batteries, coal burning, chloroalkali plants, paints, switches,
light bulbs, dental material, medical equipment, ore refining.
Tributyl tinde
Antifouling paint, biocide, plastic stabilizer.
Current-use herbicides9
Atrazine, Cyanazine, Alachlor, Metolachlor
Agricultural herbicides.
Other Pollutants
Total phosphorus, Nitrate-nitrogen
Fertilizers and sewage.
Fecal coliform, Escherichia coii
Sewage and animal waste.
Total suspended sediments
Soil erosion.
"Pollutants indented are degradation products; those shown in italics have been identified as chemicals of concern. 'Lake Erie
Chemicals of Concern identified by Lake Erie LaMP in 1994. Great Lakes Initiative Bioaccumulative Chemical of Concern (BCC).
dCOA-Tier 1 or tier 2. eBinational Toxics Strategy. ' Identified by the IJC or in Remedial Action Plans. 3USEPA. hCanadian Toxic
Substance Management Policy-Track 1.
4
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Characterization of Sources and Source Data
Many pollutant sources threaten or potentially
threaten aquatic resources and human health in
the Lake Erie basin. A description of what is
known about point and nonpoint sources within
the basin is needed. By focusing on broad
categories of pollutant sources as the first step
of the process, a better understanding of avail-
able data, data gaps, and data limitations can be
developed. The remainder of this section de-
scribes the pollutant sources and the data that
might be used to characterize concentrations and
to compute loads for the pollutants responsible
for beneficial use impairments.
Not all the pollutants of concern (Table 2) are
discussed in this section or in other sections of
the report. The pollutants inventoried herein
were selected for data characterization because
they are typical of their chemical classes with
regard to the number of results reported, collec-
tion locations, collection and analysis methods,
detection and reporting limits, frequency of
sampling, and period of record of sampling.
PCBs, DDT and its degradates, chlordane, and
mirex were selected to represent toxic and
bioaccumulative organochlorine compounds.
Benzo(a)pyrene was selected to represent a
persistent, toxic, and carcinogenic polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compound. Mer-
cury and lead were selected to represent toxic
and persistent trace metals. Total phosphorus
and nitrate-nitrogen were selected to represent
nutrients and fertilizers. Atrazine was selected
to represent the classes of commonly used
herbicides. Suspended sediment represents land
and/or stream habitat disturbance. Total
nonfilterable residue represents particulate
materials discharged from sewage that can exert
an oxygen demand on receiving waters. Fecal
coliform bacteria and Escherichia coli are
intestinal bacteria that represent the microbio-
logical pollutants in wastes from humans and
warm-blooded animals. Loads are not usually
computed for fecal bacteria because concentrations
are more appropriate.
Point Sources Discharging to Surface
Water
In this document, point sources are defined as
sources where pollutants are discharged from a
pipe or at a point. These sources are regulated to
control the concentrations and loads discharged to
surface waters and include
• Municipal wastewater
• Industrial wastewater
• Combined storm water and sewer overflows
Domestic Wastewater
Of all the Great Lakes, Lake Erie has the highest
discharge volume of domestic wastewater (Figure 2).
Sewage treatment plants (STPs) receive human
sewage, industrial effluents, and in some cases
storm water combined with sewage. STPs remove
approximately 90 percent of conventional pollutants
such as phosphorus, suspended solids, and bio-
chemical oxygen demand (BOD). By removing
suspended solids, the treatment process also
removes toxic pollutants that have an affinity for
particles. For example, the larger STPs precipitate
phosphorus using metal salts, as required under the
Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement. This
practice enhances the precipitation of solids and fine
colloidal particles and benefits water quality by
increasing removal efficiencies for absorbed
Sewage Treatment Discharge Volumes (m3/day)
Indiana
197,000
Michigan
3,474,000
New York
130,000
Ohio
2,505,000
Pennsylvania
215,000
Ontario
834,000
Total
7,355,000
5
-------
CD
CO
o
ro
o
o
su
3
Ol
(Q
CD
<
CD
3
(O
CD
—*1
I
tn
o
CO
CD
• i
CD
fi>
• i
3
CD
"D_
CD
I-
^T
CD
m
cd'
O"
&>
(/>
Sfcslel: 2,600,000
10 0 10 23 30 40 Mies
SteA£getreatrnent plants vuth
flcvvdata (cubic nretas' cfefy)
o Nbdata
© 0-1,000
o 1,000-5,000
o 5,000-10,000
« 10,000-100,000
# ©eater than 100,000
f \/ a^e'Ro/inceBxirdary
/\ SrearrB
Lckes
Lcke B'ieE&sin
o
IE
>
XI
£
5
rsi
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
"D
XI
O
o
TO
>
o
>
7s
>
s
"O
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
pollutants (Daigger and Buttz, 1992; Monteith,
1987). Nevertheless, STPs do not remove 100
percent of the pollutants.
Although STPs represent a potentially significant
source of pollutants, they also represent a significant
line of defense against the discharge of pollutants to
the environment from domestic and industrial
wastewater. For example, in Ontario approximately
12,000 industries discharge to STPs, but only 400
industries discharge their treated wastewater
directly to surface waters (Monteith, 1987). Indus-
trial discharges are not the only source of trace
pollutants in waste streams received by STPs.
Society's use and disposal of chemicals results in
pollutants in urban waste streams, even from
unlikely places. Dioxins, for example, have been
found in laundry wastewater and consequently have
been observed in STP effluents. A study of house-
hold sewage found dioxin concentrations of
0.014 |ig/L (Horstmann and McLachlan, 1995).
Dioxins have not been reported in STP effluents in
the Lake Erie basin (Tam and Diamond, in press),
and it is not suggested that laundry wastewater or
even STPs are a significant source of dioxin. This
finding simply illustrates that urban waste streams
are complex and require a number of different
strategies to optimize their treatment to protect the
Great Lakes. Municipal/industrial programs such as
industrial pretreatment and municipal sewer use
bylaws contribute significantly to minimizing the
input of pollutants to municipal wastewater plants.
In Ontario, "optimization" of the treatment process
has resulted in improved treatment efficiency
without modification of the existing facilities and at
reduced operating costs.
The presence of PCBs, a Lake Erie critical
pollutant, is of particular concern. Monteith (1987)
reported PCB concentrations in sewage effluent
ranging from 0.005 |ig/L to 0.030 |ig/L. That range
has been confirmed by more recent studies in
New York, New Jersey, and Delaware, where
the reported concentration was 0.010 to 0.055
|lg/L (Durell and Lizotte, 1998; Fikslin and
Greene, 1998). Reductions in PCB concentrations at
STPs from influent to effluent were as high as
97 percent, with an influent concentration range of
0.050 to 1.5 |ig/L. STPs are not the original sources
of PCBs or dioxins-rather, they act as conduits for
PCBs or dioxins inadvertently or deliberately
introduced into sewage collection systems.
Monteith (1987) summarized the trace concentra-
tions in sewage effluents from various Canadian and
U.S. sources (Table 3). Table 3 also illustrates the
range of reported concentrations found in sewage
sludge (note the difference in concentration units).
The implications of the higher concentrations in the
sludge are twofold. First, they are an indication of
the higher concentration of the pollutants in the
influent and removal effected by treatment. Second,
the sludge must be discarded and therefore is
another possible source from domestic wastewater.
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) and
pharmaceutical chemicals in the environment
and wastewater have recently attracted worldwide
attention. STPs receive and ultimately discharge
many of these chemicals. For example, sewage
treatment discharge impact zones have been
identified using vitamin E acetate as a tracer
(Eganhouse, R.P and I.R. Kaplan, 1985). Caffeine
has also been used as an indicator of contamination
by wastewaters (Barber etal., 1995). Studies
downstream of sewage treatment plants have
detected EDC effects in fish populations (Folmar
et al., 1996). Nonylphenol, a reported EDC, and
its metabolites have been observed in sewage
effluent at concentrations ranging from 1 to 15 |ig/L
(Lee and Peart, 1995) and from 3 to 700 |ig/L (Lee
et al., 1998), respectively. Although data are not
available to address these concerns in the Lake Erie
basin, broad scans have detected 30 to 60 pharma-
ceuticals in both treated water and rivers in
Germany (Ternes, in press). These are but a few
examples to illustrate that wastewater can contain
chemicals such as drugs and EDCs.
7
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 3. Reported concentration ranges of selected Lake Erie pollutants of concern in sewage effluent
and sludge.
Effluent Concentration
Sludge Concentration
Pollutant
(ug/L or ppb)
(mg/kg or ppm)
a-hexachlorocyclohexane
nd-0.092
nd
y-hexachlorocyclohexane
nd-0.23
0.05-27
p,p1-DDE
nd-0.03
nd
PCBs
0.005-0.030
0.11-844
Dieldrin
nd-0.02
0.05-0.81
Naphthalene
nd-47
0.06-159
Fluorene
nd-1.0
0.009-98
Phenanthrene
nd-3
0.1-593
Anthracene
0.5-1.2
0.1-114
Fluoranthene
nd-0.61
0.35-232
Pyrene
nd-0.8
0.33-171
Benz(a)anthracene
nd-1.0
0.79-33
Chrysene
nd-1.0
0.25-39
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
nd-3.0
0.63-43
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
nd-3.0
Not reported
Benzo(a)pyrene
nd-0.62
nd-28
Cadmium
0.0004-20
0.5-320
Copper
10-340
60-5200
Mercury
nd-0.9
0.037-130
Lead
nd-180
11-1440
Zinc
23-1775
22-13000
Note: nd, not detected.
Industrial Wastewater
The industrial sector, drawn to the region by the
abundant water supply in the lakes, has concen-
trated in steel production, food processing, petro-
leum refining, chemicals and allied products, and
paper. Figures 3 to 6 illustrate the extent of the
industries in the basin, showing the locations of
facilities in primary metal, fabricated metal, and
transportation equipment; petroleum refining and
chemicals; paper; and electric, gas, and sanitary
services, respectively.
Figure 7 illustrates the releases of EDCs to the
environment from the industrial sector in the
eight Great Lake states and the province of
Ontario, using data reported in the 1996 U. S.
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) and Canadian
National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI)
databases. The EDCs included in Figure 7 are
presented in Appendix A. Significant quantities of
suspected EDCs are released into the environment
in and upwind of the basin. Most of the industrial
releases are air emissions, which are discussed in a
later section. It is interesting to note that 40 percent
of the EDCs are also Lake Erie Sources and Loads
chemicals of concern (Table 2).
Industrial discharges include abroad range of
wastewater produced by various industries (e.g.,
chemical manufacturers, pulp and paper mills,
steam-electric power plants, iron and steel manu-
facturing facilities), which usually use treatment
processes designed specifically for their wastewater.
8
-------
Scale 1:2600,000
10 0 10 2D 30 40 Mies
TR and NFR facility Iocations
a Primary Metal
a Fabricated Metal
® Transportation Equipment
/\/ State/Pra/ince Boundary
Streams
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
o
HZ
>
£
EE
>,
-------
CO
o
O
O
o
"O
3
Q_
O
3"
O
3
o
a>_
-•*
o
CD
(/)
^T
(D
O
TO
fij
(/)
TR and NPR facility locations
# Petrolaim Refining
TO
%
E5
rsi
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
"D
ZO
O
o
XI
>
o
>
7s
>
s
"O
-------
TR and NFH facility locetiors
© Ffeper
/'v^Srte/Pro/ince Boundary
Streeirs
Lakes
Lake Erie E&sin
Scale 1:2,000,000
ID 0 30 20 30 40 Mies
-------
CO
CD
O
O
O
o
o
o
a I
o'
CQ
(/)
(/)
*<
^r
CD
CD
OJ
(/)
TR and NPR facility locations
& Bectric, Gas, and Sanitary
Services
/\/ State/Pro/ince Boundary
/\/ Streams
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
\
Scale 1:2,600,000
30 0 10 2D 30 40 Mies
o
IE
>
TO
%
E5
rsi
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
~o
XI
o
o
TO
>
o
>
7s
>
s
"O
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Legend(kg)
0- 999
1000- 9999
10000-99999
100000 +
Figure 7. Suspected endocrine-disrupting chemical releases, from the 1996 TRI and NPRI. (The chemicals
included are listed in Appendix A.)
Industrial wastewater treatment may be similar to
that used in municipal systems or may consist of a
wide variety of other treatment technologies.
Stormwater and Sewer Overflows
As various activities alter the watershed landscape,
adverse impacts on receiving waters may result
from changes in the quantity and quality of storm
water runoff. The magnitude and types of pollutants
associated with storm water runoff are based
largely on land use characteristics, as well as
atmospheric transport, and they vary with the
duration and intensity of rainfall events and their
antecedent dry weather periods. Table 4 illustrates
the range of reported concentrations of pollutants in
storm water from various studies throughout North
13
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
America (Makepeace et al., 1995). Besides
chemical pollutants, other characteristics of storm
water causing environmental concerns include high
runoff flows (hydraulic loading), suspended solids
(which cause physical impacts and interfere with
water quality processes), fecal bacteria (which
affect recreational waters), and heat collected on
impervious surfaces. In the United States, current
Phase I regulations under Section 402 of the Clean
Water Act require National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) storm water permits
forthe following categories:
• Storm water discharges associated with
industrial activity.
• Storm water discharges from construction
sites that disturb 5 acres or more.
• Discharges from municipal separate storm
sewers from cities with populations of more
than 100,000.
Additional regulations currently under develop-
ment will be issued in 1999. The Phase II
NPDES storm water program will focus on sepa-
rate storm sewer systems in smaller municipalities
and construction activities on 1 to 5 acres.
In Ontario, discharges to storm water sewers also
have allowable limits defined in the Provincial
Model Sewer Use Bylaw. Discharges to storm
water sewers may not include PCBs or pesticides.
The limit for mercury discharges to storm water
sewers is 1 |ig/L.
A combined sewer overflow (CSO), by design and
by function, carries both sanitary sewage and storm
water. During dry weather, these systems should
carry all sanitary flows to the STP for treatment as
specified in the NPDES permit. Discharges of
CSOs during dry weather are prohibited. During
periods of rainfall or snowmelt, the sewer carrying
capacity can be exceeded, causing an overflow at
relief points in the sewer system. These relief points
are often designed into the sewer system to prevent
basement flooding or overloading of the wastewater
treatment facilities. CSOs should not be confused
with sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs), which occur
Pollutant
Concentration (ug/L)
Naphthalene
0.036-2.3
Fluorene
0.096-1.0
Phenanthrene
0.045-10.0
Anthracene
0.009-10.0
Fluoranthene
0.03-56.0
Pyrene
0.045-10.0
Benzo(a)anthracene
0.0003-10.0
Chrysene
0.0038-10.0
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
0.0012-10.0
Benzo(a)pyrene
0.0025-10.0
a- hexachlorocyclohexane
0.0027-0.1
y- hexachlorocyclohexane
0.052-11.0
p,p'-DDE
nd-0.015
Dieldrin
0.005-0.1
Cadmium
0.05-13,730
Copper
0.06-1,410
Mercury
0.05-67.0
Lead
0.57-26,000
Zinc
0.7-22,000
PCBs
0.03-11
Note: nd, not detected.
Table 4. Concentration ranges of selected Lake Erie pollutants of concern in storm water.
14
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
when sanitary sewage is diluted by storm water
infiltrating into sanitary sewers during heavy rains.
Though CSOs are not subj ect to secondary treat-
ment requirements at the end of the pipe, they must
not cause a violation in water quality-based stan-
dards in receiving waters. The quality of CSO
discharge water can vary significantly depending on
the area drained and rainstorm characteristics.
Pollutants commonly found in CSO discharges
include suspended solids, BOD, chemical
oxygen demand (COD), nutrients (including
ammonia), fecal bacteria, metals, hydrocarbons,
PAHs, and other toxic pollutants.
Point Source Discharge or Release Data
Municipal and industrial point source discharg-
ers to surface waters (Figure 8) may be required
to report selected specific chemical loadings,
and these data are subsequently entered into the
Permit Compliance System (PCS) in the United
States and the Sample Results Data Store
(SRDS) in Ontario. Estimated emissions for
various chemicals are reported in TRI in the
United States and NPRI in Ontario. Air emis-
sions of some toxics are also reported in the
Regional Air Pollution Inventory Database
System (RAPIDS).
The NPDES program in the United States and
the Municipal-Industrial Strategy for Abatement
(MISA) program in Ontario regulate the dis-
charges from the municipal and industrial
sectors. Data from NPDES reports submitted to
EPA or the states by dischargers are stored in
PCS. Data from MISA reports submitted to the
Ontario Ministry of Environment (MOE) are
stored in SRDS. The NPDES and MISA pro-
grams establish discharge limits and monitoring
requirements intended to control the magnitude
of discharges to water bodies. Whether a facility
is required to obtain an NPDES permit depends
on where the facility discharges. In general, if
the facility discharges into the waters of the
United States, it requires an NPDES permit. If
the discharge enters a municipal sanitary sewer
system, it might not require an NPDES permit, but
if the discharge is into a municipal storm sewer
system, the plant might need a permit, depending on
what it discharges.
The permits issued under the NPDES and MISA
programs establish monitoring and reporting re-
quirements for concentrations and/or loads of
pollutants for each permitted discharge point. The
major dischargers, defined by EPA as those that
discharge more than 1 million gallons per day or
that have a significant environmental impact, are
required to monitor more frequently than smaller
dischargers. For most facilities, information on the
analytical detection limits for the monitored pollut-
ants is not included in PCS. However, maximum
detection limits are specified in Method 625 as
required in 40 CFRPart 136 and MOE's MISA
requirements (Table 5). In the United States,
detection limits are modified as permits are re-
viewed, making it difficult to characterize the
available information. As the Great Lakes Initiative
(GLI) program is implemented, detection limits will
become much lower. For example, New York
currently uses 0.065 |ig/L as the detection limit for
PCBs, and according to Foran (1991), both Ohio's
and Michigan's detection limit for PCBs was 0.1 |ig/L
at the time of that report. All dischargers in the
United States must follow EPA methods for
sample collection and analysis, and all dischargers
in Ontario must follow MISA requirements,
which specify certain detection limits. Specific
detection or reporting limit information is available
only through review of each facility's discharge
monitoring reports. These reports were not re-
viewed because the magnitude of such an effort
is beyond the scope of this document.
The basis for the selection criteria used to screen
data from PCS and SRDS is included in Appen-
dix B. These criteria recommend that the mini-
mum number of observations needed to charac-
terize concentrations of pollutants discharged
from point sources is 10. However, if data are
censored (reported below detection), 25 to 50
percent or more of the observations should be
15
-------
O)
(Q
O
GO
O
o
(/)
o
o
o
(/)
<
CD
CD
CQ
CD
Q_
(/)
O
CO
CD
(/)
as
^r
CD
CD
DO
fis
(/)
%
>
Scale 1:2,600,000
30 0 10 2D 30 40 Mies
m PCSandSRCSfacilily
locations
/\/ State/Pra/ince Boundary
/\/ StreamB
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
o
IE
>
TO
%
E5
rsi
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
~o
ZO
o
o
XI
>
o
>
7s
>
s
"O
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 5. Required minimum analytical detection limits reported in SRDS and PCS databases.
Pollutant
All values in micrograms per liter
SRDSa PCS"
Acenaphthene
1.3
1.9
Acenaphthylene
1.4
3.5
Anthracene
1.2
1.9
Benz(a)anthracene
0.5
7.8
Benzo(a)pyrene
0.6
2.5
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
0.7
4.8
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
0.7
4.1
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
0.7
2.5
Chrysene
0.3
2.5
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
1.3
2.5
Fluoranthene
0.4
2.2
Fluorene
1.7
1.9
lndeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene
1.3
3.7
Naphthalene
1.6
1.6
Phenanthrene
0.4
5.4
Pyrene
0.4
1.9
PCBs
0.1
30-36°
Chlordane
nre
0.014d
p,p' DDT
nre
4.7
p,p' DDE
nre
5.6
p,p' DDD
nre
2.8
Dieldrin
nre
2.5
Mi rex
nre
nre
Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCCD)
0.0039
0.002
Mercury
0.1
0.2e
Lead
30
100f
"1998 Ontario MISA municipal regulations.
' Federal Register, 1984, Guidelines establishing test procedures for the analysis of pollutants under the Clean Water Act; final rule
and interim final rule and proposed rule: Part VIII, 40 CFR Part 136.
Ohio's and Michigan's detection limit for PCBs was 0.1|jg/L in 1991 (Foran, 1991). New York's detection limit for PCBs is 0.065
Mg/L
1 American Public Health Association, American Waterworks Association, and Water Pollution Control Federation, 1985, pp. 538-
549.
enr, none reported.
'USEPA, 1979, pp. 239.1 and 245.1.
reported above the detection limit. The minimum
criteria established to compute loads discharged
from point sources were at least 25 percent of the
observations above the detection limit. Dischargers
are required to report discharge volume along with
concentrations so this criterion was met for maj or
dischargers that reported data (Figures 2 and 8).
In reviewing the detection limits used in PCS and
MISA, it is worth noting that some of the detection
limits are similar, but in general the provincial detection
limits are lower. Unfortunately, PCB detection limits
are too high in either database to characterize
concentrations or to measure the PCB load from
sewage treatment plants. The effluents from sewage
treatment plants typically contain PCB concentra-
tions from 0.005 to 0.03 |ig/L. Note that the
detection limits required in PCS were established
almost 20 years ago. With advances in analytical
chemistry, lower detection limits are possible.
PCS data reported by dischargers in the United
States from 1986 to 1997 are summarized in
Table 6. For Ontario, data included in the 1995
SRDS are summarized in Table 7. The United
States regulated mercury at 170 facilities from 1986
to 1997; no detections were found at 77 percent of
7,664 observations (Table 6). An examination of
17
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
the mercury concentration data reported for On-
tario in 1995 shows that only 18 of the 143 obser-
vations, or 12.6 percent, were above detection, not
sufficient to characterize concentrations or to
compute loads (Table 7). These data could be used
for source track-down because 12 of the 18
observations above detection came from one
facility. For PCBs, the number of observations
above the detection limit ranged from 0 to 5 percent
for Ontario and the United States, respectively.
Similar patterns were observed for other pollutants
representing classes of organochlorine compounds
and for PAHs. Conversely, concentration data
reported in PCS and SRDS for lead, total phos-
phorus, nitrate-nitrogen, and total nonfilterable
residue appeared to be suitable for preliminary
assessment of concentrations and loads to Lake
Erie. Data for fecal coliform bacteria and E. coli in
PCS appear to be suitable to characterize concen-
trations, and because they are reported for many
locations they are suitable for further assessment.
Figures 9 through 12 present the point source
discharge locations for facilities regulated to report
discharges of benzo(a)pyrene, mercury, PCBs, and
total phosphorus. Of the three pollutants, only total
phosphorus is widely reported across the basin.
Toxics Emission Data
Two databases provide most of the data used to
report releases of hazardous and toxic chemicals.
The TRI contains information on toxic chemicals
Pollutant class
Pollutant
Number of
Facilities
Number of
Observations
Percent Above
Reporting
Limit
Organochlorine
DDT
3
127
2
Compounds
Mi rex
0
0
0
Dioxin
1
94
0
Chlordane
0
0
0
PCBs
15
926
5
Polynuclear Aromatic
Anthracene
0
0
0
Hydrocarbons
Benz(a)anthracene
2
18
0
Benzo(a)pyrene
5
59
7
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
0
0
0
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
0
0
0
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
0
0
0
Chrysene
2
18
0
lndeno(123-cd)pyrene
0
0
0
Fluoranthene
3
260
0
Trace Metals
Mercury
170
7,664
23
Lead
214
11,522
40
Other Pollutants
Total phosphorus
591
47,609
74
Nitrate-nitrogen
153
9,883
92
Fecal coliform bacteria
388
17,234
72
Escherichia coli
93
1,994
75
Total nonfilterable residue
945
98,523
70
Table 6. Pollutant class, pollutant, number of reporting facilities, number of observations, and percent of
samples reported above the detection limit, Lake Erie basin in the United States; 1986-1997.
18
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 7. Pollutant class, pollutant, number of reporting facilities, number of observations, and percent of
samples reported above the detection limit, Lake Erie basin in Ontario, 1995.
Pollutant Class
Pollutant
Number of
Facilities
Number of
Observations
Percent
Above
Reporting
Limit
Organochlorine
DDT
0
0
0
Compounds
Mi rex
0
0
0
Dioxin
17
62
1.6
Chlordane
0
0
0
PCBs
15
37
0
Polynuclear aromatic
Anthracene
19
43
0
hydrocarbons
Benz(a)anthracene
13
35
0
Benzo(a)pyrene
19
69
0
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
13
35
0
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
13
35
0
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
19
43
0
Chrysene
19
43
0
lndeno(123-cd)pyrene
19
43
0
Fluoranthene
19
43
0
Trace Metals
Mercury and its compounds
21
143
12.6
Lead and its compounds
17
1,514
73.2
Other Pollutants
Total phosphorus
31
1,530
83
Nitrate-nitrogen (in solution,
13
41
73
pH > 6.0)
Fecal coliform bacteria
1
8
25
Escherichia coli
1
30
47
Total nonfilterable residue
40
7,372
83.9
that are being used, manufactured, treated, trans-
ported, or released into the environment. Section 313
of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-
To-Know Act and Section 6607 of the Pollution
Prevention Act mandate that this information be
publicly accessible. The data contained in TRI
include more than 600 chemicals and can illustrate
the locations of potential sources of pollutants. Any
facility listed in Standard Industrial Classification
(SIC) code 20 to 39 with more than 10 full-time
employees that manufactures or uses 25,000 lb/yr
or more or otherwise uses 10,000 lb/yr or more of
any one TRI chemical is required to participate in
the system. The TRI data represent estimated
releases rather than measured concentrations or
loads. Because TRI data include direct and indirect
releases, the same facilities sometimes report to both
TRI and PC S. All of the data reported in PC S,
however, represent measured values.
NPRI provides information on the on-site Canadian
releases to air, water, and land; transfers off-site in
wastes; and recovery, reuse, and recycling (3Rs) of
176 listed substances. TheNPRIisthe only legislated,
nationwide, publicly accessible inventory of releases
and transfers in Canada. Facilities that manufacture,
process, and/or use any of theNPRI-listed
substances in quantities of 10,000 kg (22,000 lb)
or more per year in a concentration equal to or
greater than 1 percent and that employ 10 or more
19
-------
CO
CD
CD
O
CD
(/>
3
o
a-
CD
N
O
T3
*<
CD
3
CD
O
I-
fi>
7T
O
DO
(/>
# Facil ities that mDnitor for
benzD(a)p/reneas reported
in PCSandSRC6
/\/ State/Pro/ince Boundary
Streams
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
\
Scale 1:2,600,000
30 0 10 2D 30 40 Mies
o
~=
>
TO
%
E5
rsi
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
"D
XI
O
o
TO
>
o
TO
>
7s
>
s
"O
-------
® Facil ities that rronitor for
rrercury as reported
in PCSandSRC6
/\/ State/Pra/ince Boundaty
StrearrB
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
Scale 1:2600,000
10 0 10 20 30 40 Mies
-------
CO
c
fij
o
o
(/)
3
o
~o
o
03
U)
o
I-
^r
o
CD
CXI
(/)
# Facil ities that rronitor for
PCBsas reported in PCS
andSRDS
/\/ State/Pro/ince Boundary
Streams
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
\
Scale 1:2,600,000
30 0 10 2D 30 40 Mies
o
~=
>
TO
%
E5
rsi
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
"D
ZO
O
o
XI
>
o
>
7s
>
s
"O
-------
ro
co
(Q
C
CD
ro
su
o
o
_
T3
3"
o
(/>
"O
13"
o
£=
^r
o
(D
CD
(/)
&
>
Scale 1:2600,000
10 0 10 2D 30 40 Mies
® Facil ities that rronitor for
total phosphorus as
reported in PCS and SRDS
/\/ State/Pra/ince Boundary
Streams
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
o
HZ
>
£
5
>,
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
!—
I—
m
O
o
~o
O
O
>
O
7D
>
7s
>
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
people per year will meet all NPRI reporting criteria
and must report any releases or transfers in wastes
of those substances to Environment Canada. The
TRI and NPRI databases were queried for
releases for the 1996 reporting year. Table 8
illustrates whether the pollutants of concern are
included in TRI and NPRI. Table 9 summarizes
reported releases in 1996 for all chemicals to
water, air, and land from the eight Great Lake
states and the province of Ontario. The top 25
chemicals released into the environment from
major industries in the Great Lakes states as
reported in the 1996 TRI and in Ontario as reported in
the 1996 NPRI are presented in Tables 10 and 11,
respectively. The TRI and NPRI programs only
partially cover the chemicals of interest to the
LaMP. Mercury is included in both programs, but
PCBs are included only in TRI.
The significant releases to air justify the need to be
aware of sources outside the Lake Erie watershed
specifically. The emissions from the eight Great Lakes
states and the province have been obtained and
analyzed at this time. Subsequent analysis may extend
to a broader geographical area. Other programs such
as the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy and
the North American Regional Action Plan developed
by theNorth American Commission for Environmen-
tal Cooperation are dealing with emissions from
outside as well as within the Great Lakes basin. The
Lake Erie LaMP Sources and Loadings activities
will need to reflect these other programs.
Table 8. Lake Erie LaMP pollutants of concern reported in the TRI and NPRI inventories, 1996.
Pollutant
TRI
NPRI
DDT, Chlordane, Dieldrin, Mirex
No
No
a-hexachlorocyclohexane
Yes
No
y-hexachlorocyclohexane (Lindane)
Yes
No
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Yes
No
Dioxin
No
No
Hexachlorobenzene
Yes
No
Octachlorostyrene
No
No
Anthracene
Yes
Yes
Other PAHs3
Yes
No
Phenanthrene
Yes
No
Cadmium (and its compounds)
Yes
Yes
Copper (and its compounds)
Yes
Yes
Lead (and its compounds)
Yes
Yes
Mercury (and its compounds)
Yes
Yes
Zinc (and its compounds)
Yes
Yes
Total phosphorus, nitrate (in solution at pH > 6.0)
Yes
Yes
Fecal coliform, Escherichia coli
No
No
Suspended solids
No
No
Atrazine, Cyanazine
Yes
No
Metolachlor, Alachlor
No
No
'Other PAHs include benz(a)anthracene, benzo(a)pyrene, benzo(k)fluoranthene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, chrysene,
dibenzo(a,h)anthracene, fluoranthene, and indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene.
Table 9. Total releases of chemicals in eight Great Lakes states and Ontario, from the 1996 TRI and NPRI
databases.
Releases to Water (kg)
Releases to Air (kg)
Releases to Landfills (kg)
TRI
20 X 106
160 X 106
31 X 106
NPRI
4.4 X 106
48 X 106
3.8 X 106
24
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 10. Top 25 chemicals released into the
environment in 1996 reported in TRI
(total for eight Great Lakes states)
Chemical
Released
(kg)
Toluene
18,994,350
Nitrate (in solution at pH > 6.0)
17,437,917
Ammonia (total)
16,190,209
Zinc (and its compounds)
16,075,928
Xylene (mixed isomers)
14,661,397
Methanol
12,841,244
Manganese (and its compounds)
11,881,982
Hydrochloric acid aerosols
9,990,413
n-Hexane
9,046,862
Dichloromethane
8,802,883
Methyl ethyl ketone
8,357,169
Glycol ethers
7,916,449
Styrene
6,285,163
Trichloroethylene
5,189,565
Carbon disulfide
4,355,631
n-butyl alcohol
3,706,122
Methyl isobutyl ketone
3,625,136
Carbonyl sulfide
3,004,472
Sulfuric acid aerosols
2,368,900
Phenol
1,849,658
Ethylene
1,586,130
Chromium
1,574,211
Ethylbenzene
1,517,932
Tetrachloroethylene
1,331,188
Formaldehyde
1,265,953
In 1996 the Great Lakes states reported releases of
1,472 kg of mercury from 15 facilities and 116 kg
of PCBs from three facilities, virtually all released to
the air. In 1996 the NPRI reported releases of
1,206 kg of mercury from two facilities, most
released to the atmosphere. Only 4 pollutants of
concern in Lake Erie rank among the top 25
pollutants released to the environment in the Great
Lakes region. In the 1996 TRI, nitrate ranked 2nd
and zinc ranked 4th (Table 10); in the 1996 NPRI,
nitrate ranked 9th, zinc ranked 14th, copper ranked
22nd, and nickel ranked 25th (Table 11).
Table 11. The top 25 chemicals released into the
environment in 1996 reported in NPRI
(total for Ontario)
Released
Chemical
(kg)
Ammonia (total)
7,579,616
Xylene (mixed isomers)
5,127,102
Sulfuric acid
4,622,876
Hydrochloric acid
4,296,318
Toluene
4,256,816
Methanol
3,729,681
Methyl ethyl ketone
3,677,901
Cyclohexane
2,842,599
Nitrate (in solution at pH > 6.0)
1,637,687
Dichloromethane
1,611,506
Isopropyl alcohol
1,500,468
Benzene
1,409,562
Ethylene glycol
1,304,933
Zinc (and its compounds)
1,164,354
Acetone
1,105,827
n-Butyl alcohol
981,436
Ethylene
966,673
Trichloroethylene
778,310
Manganese (and its compounds)
710,330
Methyl isobutyl ketone
679,642
Chloromethane
648,505
Copper (and its compounds)
539,104
Propylene
496,793
Ethylbenzene
474,899
Nickel (and its compounds)
383,564
Nonpoint Sources
Nonpoint sources, as defined in this document, are
those sources for which the discharge of a pollutant
into the environment is diffuse and therefore difficult
to quantify and control. TheNPS pollutants of
concern for the Sources and Loadings Subcommit-
tee are nitrogen, phosphorus, sediment, atrazine,
cyanazine, alachlor, and metolachlor. The nonpoint
sources described in this document include agriculture
and abandoned solid waste and hazardous waste
landfills.
25
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Agriculture
Unlike pollutants from municipal and industrial
facilities that discharge directly to surface waters,
agricultural chemicals applied to the land surface
normally do not pose a significant or
an immediate threat to surface waters unless they
are washed off during storm events. Once agricul-
tural chemicals have been applied to the land
surface, their ultimate environmental fate is decided
by several factors, including the method of applica-
tion, the time elapsed from application, the physical
and chemical properties of the chemicals, and the
physical characteristics of the land on which the
chemicals were applied.
The Lake Erie basin in the United States includes
parts of 64 different counties in Indiana, Michigan,
New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. Excluding
New York, 3.3 million hectares (8.2 million acres)
of crops were planted. Most of the agricultural land
use is in the western part of the basin. In 1995,
41 percent of the acreage was planted in soybeans
and 32.5 percent in field corn. Other significant
crops included wheat (14.9 percent), hay (9 percent),
and oats (1.3 percent). In the Ontario portion of the
Lake Erie watershed, Statistics Canada reported
that agricultural crops were cultivated on 1,397,020
hectares (3,446,448 acres) of land in 1991 (from
a 1994 report, Human Activities and the Environ-
ment). Of that land, 791,690 hectares (1,953,099
acres) were wide-row monoculture crops like corn,
soybeans, vegetables, and tobacco, which require
more pesticides and fertilizers and, depending on
the tillage regime, are subj ect to higher rates of
erosion than close-row crops like wheat.
Ontario Municipal Discharges of Phosphorus
(kg) Compared to Agricultural Application3
Municipal Agricultural
Phosphorus 215,000 70,316,000
Nitrogen 3,225,000 136,000,000
aTotal nitrogen discharges based on a 15:1 ratio between
nitrogen and phosphorus in sewage effluent.
Pesticide use in the U. S. portion of the Lake
Erie basin for 1992 totaled 3.75 million kg
(8,280,250 lb), which is very high compared to
the rest of the Great Lakes basin (Gianessi and
Anderson, 1995a-h). According to a pesticide use
survey conducted every 5 years by the Ontario
Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs,
3.80 million kg (8.36 million lb) of pesticides were
used in the Ontario portion of the watershed in
1993 (OMAFRA, 1993).
Atrazine use by county is presented in Figure 13.
The concentrations of atrazine in the Great Lakes
reflect their proximity to application (Figure 14).
Many agricultural pesticides are suspected EDCs.
Figure 15 illustrates the application of suspected
EDCs within the Great Lakes states and the prov-
ince of Ontario in 1993. As with the TRI and NPRI
EDC release distribution, many suspected EDCs
are used in and upwind of the Lake Erie basin.
Agricultural nonpoint sources also can generate
large bacterial loads during individual runoff-
producing events. For agricultural lands, the
most significant sources of bacteria are animal
operations, where large quantities of fecal
matter are generated, stored, and land-applied.
The major pollutants associated with agriculture
are nutrients (primarily nitrogen and phosphorus),
sediment, pesticides, and when animals are present,
bacteria or other pathogens. From 0.1 percent to
10 percent of agricultural pesticides enter the
aqueous environment after application (Larson et al.,
1997). For streams, nitrogen yields in agricultural
areas were less than or equal to about half of the
total nonpoint inputs of nitrogen from the atmo-
sphere, commercial fertilizer, and manure. Phospho-
rus yields were less than or equal to about one-sixth
of the total phosphorus inputs from commercial
fertilizer and manure (Fuhrer et al., 1999).
In general, the agricultural chemicals identified as
pollutants of concern in the Lake Erie LaMP enter
surface waters as a result of runoff-producing
storms that occur after application in the spring and
26
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
1993 Atrazine Usage
Atrazine kg/ha
Figure 13.1993 atrazine use in Great Lakes Region
Atrazine (ng/L) - in WTP's ( •). in Tributaries (
in Connecting Channels and in the open lake ( ¦ surveillance program.
Atrazine (ng/L)
• Non-Detect
Canadian Atrazine Guideline for Protection of Aquatic Life = 2000 ng/L; and for Drinking Water = 5000 ng/L.
WTP data from 1993 MO EE DWS Program.
MO EE tributary data from 1992 (Thames) and 1993 (Grand &Saugeen) MO EE FWQMN Program.
Niagara River average of Environment Canada 1992 and 1993 data.
Open lake surveillance data from Environment Canada (Erie) and Schottler and Eisenreich (1994) (Huron, Erie and Ontario).
US tributary data from Richards and Baker (1993).
Figure 14. Atrazine concentrations in the lower lakes: 1992-1993.
27
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
^ \ EDCs (kq/ha)
v
B-i - ^
Insignificant Use
0.001 - 0.150
0.150-0.300
d=i -J—f—J" Vy / \ lKMj
0.300 - 0.450
1 i 1 ~T i*^j L—> r1! ' J / \ D
0.450 - 0.600
_
0.600 - 0.750
u
0.750 +
Figure 15. Suspected endocrine-disrupting chemicals used in agriculture in 1993.
summer or from improper application or disposal.
Of the agricultural chemicals included in the LaMP,
nitrogen and phosphorus are most commonly used
in the basin. The pesticide DDT and its derivatives,
mirex, and chlordane are no longer used, and the
effects associated with these pollutants can be
classified as "legacy" effects; that is, the impair-
ments observed today are the results of past
practices. The chemicals have accumulated in bed
sediments and wildlife to a degree that is difficult to
characterize or mitigate.
Conservation tillage is an agricultural best manage-
ment practice that reduces erosion from row crops
like corn and soybeans. Erosion takes place when
raindrops strike cultivated, bare soil and dislodge
soil particles, which are subsequently carried by
overland runoff to streams and lakes. Conservation
tillage maintains 30 percent or greater ground cover
on current-year fields using the residue from the
previous year's crop. Tillage is greatly reduced or
not practiced in this form of cultivation. In north-
western Ohio from 1988 to 1997, conservation
tillage increased on corn and soybean fields from
about 10 percent to 54 percent as a result of
intensive efforts by state and federal resource
management agencies (U.S. Department of
Agriculture, 1998). Trends in suspended sediment
loads appear to have decreased about 17.5 percent
(Baker et al., 1998) in the Maumee River at
Waterville, Ohio, as a result of the high rate of
implementation of conservation tillage. Main-
taining and increasing participation in conserva-
tion tillage by farmers is an important goal for
the agricultural sector in the Lake Erie basin.
28
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Abandoned Solid Waste and Hazardous
Waste Landfills
Wastes generally fall into two categories-hazardous
waste and solid (nonhazardous) waste. To make
waste management more effective, governments are
promoting recycling and source reduction to
decrease the toxicity and quantity of waste and are
providing safer disposal capacity by improving the
design and management of incinerators and landfills.
Historically landfills have been associated with some
significant problems, including groundwater
contamination. In the United States, the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulates
the management of municipal solid waste and
hazardous waste.
A comparison of LaMP pollutants to the constitu-
ents of hazardous wastes regulated by RCRA is
presented in Table 12. From this information, it
might be possible to map RCRA hazardous waste
generators and handlers by ZIP code to determine
the location and quantity of hazardous wastes within
the watershed.
Municipal solid waste is managed in accordance
with state requirements that meet federal
municipal waste standards. In the United States,
27 percent of municipal solid waste is recycled,
16 percent is incinerated, and 57 percent is dis-
posed of in landfills. The Municipal Solid Waste
Landfill regulations, established in 1993, apply to all
municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLF) receiving
waste after October 9,1993; however, landfills
closed before October 9,1991, need not comply.
An MSWLF can accept household solid waste,
commercial solid waste, nonhazardous sludge, small
quantity generator waste, and industrial solid waste.
The MSWLF criteria do not apply to landfills that
accept only industrial nonhazardous waste.
Table 12. Pollutants of concern regulated by RCRA for the Lake Erie Basin.
Simplified Description of RCRA Waste Stream Regulated and RCRA Waste Code
PCBs As constituents present in chlorobenzene production bv-products K085
Chlordane As a constituent in chlordane production by-products, as a discarded pesticide, and as a
constituent in solid waste K097, U036, and D020
DDT As discarded products or chemical intermediates U061and U060
Mercury As a constituent present in waste from the production of iron and steel, inorganic chemicals,
and veterinary pharmaceuticals; as a discarded product or chemical intermediate; and as a
constituent in solid wastes K061, K071, K101, K106, P065, P092, U151, and D009
Dioxin As a constituent in wastes from production of certain chlorobenzenes or chlorophenols, and
their treatment residues and wastewaters F020, F021, F022, F023, F026, F027, F028, F032,
K043,and K099
PAHs As a constituent in wood preserving process wastes; as a constituent in petroleum refining
wastes; as a constituent in leachate; as a constituent in wastes from the production of organic
chemicals, pesticides, refined petroleum, and coke; and as discarded products or chemical
intermediates F032. F034, F037, F038, F039, K001, K015, K022, K035, K048, K049, K050,
K052, K060, K087, K141, K142, K143, K144, K145, K147, K148, U018, U022, U050, U063,
and U137
29
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 13. Number of municipal solid waste landfills; RCRA Treatment, Storage and Disposal sites; CERCLA
sites; and National Priority List sites in five Great Lakes States.
State
MSWLF
RCRA TSD
CERCLA
NPL (final)
Indiana
32
126
175
29
Michigan
54
96
239
69
New York
42
114
533
85
Ohio
63
237
232
32
Pennsylvania
47
126
545
98
MSWLF s must conduct groundwater monitoring
and must be operated to ensure they do not release
pollutants at levels that violate the Clean Water Act.
Table 13 presents the total number of active munici-
pal landfills in each of five Great Lakes states.
Past practices were not as stringent as they are
today. The Comprehensive Environmental Re-
sponse, Compensation, and Liability Act
(CERCLA), known as "Superfund," provides
EPA the authority to respond to releases or
potential releases of toxic and hazardous sub-
stances that may endanger human health or the
environment from abandoned hazardous waste
sites. CERCLA requires EPA to maintain a
National Priorities List (NPL) of all sites that
require remedial action because of imminent
danger to the public or the environment. The Great
Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy Pesticide
Report (USEPA, 1998) presents information on
the presence of the pesticides aldrin, dieldrin,
chlordane, DDT, mirex, and toxaphene at haz-
ardous waste sites in the Great Lakes region. The
number of CERCLA and NPL sites in each state is
presented in Table 13.
In Ontario, the generation, handling, and disposal of
waste materials are regulated extensively by both
provincial and federal regulations. Regulation 347
Table 14. Quantity of selected Lake Erie pollutants of concern transferred to landfills, 1996.
Pollutants of Concern
TRI Transfer to Landfills (kg)
NPRI Transfer to Landfills (kg)
PCBs
0
Not included in inventory
PAHs
15,600
15,014
Mercury (and its compounds)
0
186
of the Ontario Environmental Protection Act
establishes three categories of waste that dictate the
responsibilities of generators, operators, and
transporters. Waste is categorized as (1) hazardous,
liquid industrial waste that does not meet the criteria
of a hazardous waste; (2) registerable waste that
produces a leachate of intermediate toxicity but
less than the criteria for hazardous waste; and
(3) nonregisterable waste.
In the Ontario portion of the Lake Erie watershed,
87 landfills are active and 464 are closed. Of the
active sites, only four accept hazardous waste.
Under the Canada-Ontario Agreement (CO A)
Respecting the Great Lakes Basin Ecosystem, the
OntarioMOE has assessed 377 closed sites
throughout the province that were considered to
have the greatest potential for adverse environmen-
tal effects and has identified no significant impacts.
As mentioned above, transfers to landfills are
reported in both the TRI and NPRI inventories.
The quantities of PCBs, PAHs, and mercury
transferred to landfills as reported in the 1996
TRI and NPRI are presented in Table 14.
30
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Water Quality and Ancillary Data
The data used in this report were gathered
mainly from public sector environmental and
water-quality monitoring programs that are
binational, federal, state, and provincial. Data
sources not in the public sector were private
academic institutions and water-research labora-
tories. Data obtained from these organizations
do not represent the full range of available
information. The data described in this report
are restricted to those available in digital for-
mats. The pollutants, screening procedures, and
data-selection criteria are the same as those
described in the preceding section on point
sources and are detailed in Appendix B.
The digital data sources evaluated in this
section include those describing pollutant
concentrations in
• Lake Erie, its tributaries, and its connecting
channels
• Aquatic sediments
• Fish
• The atmosphere
In addition to data on chemical contaminants from
water and other media, ancillary data on streamflow
and/or lake level are needed to compute contami-
nant loads. Because concentrations are frequently
related to streamflows and lake levels, these
hydrologic data are needed to establish how well
contaminant concentrations represent the possible
range of hydrologic conditions. The primary agency
responsible for the collection and analysis of
streamflow data in the United States is the U. S.
Geological Survey (USGS). Streamflow gaging
stations are present near the outflows of most
principal Lake Erie tributaries in the United States.
Information from the USGS on the relative contri-
bution of streamflow to Lake Erie from its principal
tributaries in the United States is available in a water
quality assessment report by Casey and others
(1997). Both historical and near real-time values for
streamflows are available at USGS state office links
from the URL http://water.usgs.gov. The agency
responsible for streamflow data in Canada is the
Water Survey of Canada. In the United States, the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA) operate a system of water-level gages on
the connecting channels and on Lake Erie.
Water Quali lie, the
Connectiifi" i" Iiannelli. >1 nil m ries
Water-quality data are reported as chemical
concentrations in milligrams (mg), micrograms
(|ig), or nanograms (ng) per liter, which are
generally equivalent to parts per million, billion,
or trillion, respectively. Loads are the product of
concentration and streamflow and are reported
as grams or kilograms per unit of time (day,
month, season, or year).
Concentration data can be used to identify and
track sources of pollutants in the environment.
Concentration data can be used to evaluate
pollutants in relation to standards, criteria, or
guidelines for the protection of water quality,
aquatic life, and human health. Loading data can
be used to compare the mass of a contaminant
that is delivered to or from streams, point
sources, and the atmosphere. Identification of
the contaminant loading sources to Lake Erie
can provide information on when, where, and
how quantities of pollutants enter Lake Erie.
In the United States, STORET is the primary
database containing information on chemical
quality (concentrations), physical characteristics,
and ancillary data for surface water and ground-
water. STORET contains information submitted
by federal, state, and interstate agencies, universi-
ties, contractors, and water-research laboratories.
In Canada, ENVIRODAT and PWQMN are the
primary databases containing information on the
chemical quality and physical characteristics of
31
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
streams and lakes. The STORET, PWQMN, and
ENVIRODAT databases contain identifying infor-
mation on collecting agency, site name, site number,
location by latitude and longitude, sampling date
and time, sample medium, sample type, units of
measure, and remark codes to indicate detection
limits and other data qualifiers.
Data of defined quality are needed to provide
confidence in results and interpretations of data
analyses. Appendix B provides an explanation
of the rationale for data-selection procedures
and selection criteria used in this report to
determine which data are of sufficient quality
and quantity to be suitable for the objectives of
this report. To use these data with confidence
requires that the reported sample concentrations
or loads be representative of the location from
which samples were taken and that the samples
be collected at an appropriate frequency to
describe the range of concentrations, loads, and
streamflow or lake level at a particular site.
The next logical step once data have been
identified for further analysis is to review
sample-collection and analysis methods. Al-
though important, examination of specific
collection and analysis methods and quality
control procedures and programs was beyond
the scope of this report. Because of the need to
further screen the data for methods comparabil-
ity, the data in the tables and figures in this
section are considered to be potentially useful
for the intended purpose of characterizing
concentrations and loads of pollutants of con-
cern to Lake Erie.
For purposes of this report, concentration data
sets from Lake Erie, its tributaries, and connect-
ing channels with at least 10 samples per site
and for which all sample results are reported as
detected are considered suitable for the description
of contaminant concentrations. Data sets with
censored data also were judged to be suitable for
the computation of statistical summaries if the
detection frequency was at least 50 percent for
sample sizes of 25 to 49 and at least 25 percent for
sample sizes of 50 or more. Data sets considered
potentially suitable for the computation of tributary
loads should be represented by at least 50 samples
per site and detection limits should be low enough
that at least 25 percent of the samples are reported
above the detection limits. Samples applicable to
the computation of loads must be collected at or
near a daily streamflow gage. The samples also
must be collected over a range of low to high
streamflows representative of the stream at the
sample-collection site.
The results of the initial data screening are
presented in the remainder of this section.
Summary tables of the number of observations,
the number of sites, and the percentage of samples
above the detection limit for selected pollutants of
concern in surface waters of the United States and
Canada are provided (Tables 15 through 17).
At tributary sites (Tables 15 and 16), detection
frequencies for concentrations of total PCBs,
total DDT, total chlordane, dieldrin, mirex,
benzo(a)pyrene, and mercury were less than the
minimum of 50 percent and the number of
samples per site was often less than 10, indicat-
ing insufficient data to characterize concentra-
tions. Maps of the location of sampling sites and
the number of observations reported per site
show the limited extent of monitoring programs
for these pollutants. Examples are given for two
selected pollutants, benzo(a)pyrene (Figure 16)
and mercury (Figure 17). In both countries, there
were fewer than 10 tributary sites where 10 or
more samples were collected for analysis of
concentrations of organochlorine pollutants and
benzo(a)pyrene. In the United States, there were
74 sites with 10 or more samples reported for
mercury, but there were few detections.
Concentrations of atrazine, total phosphorus,
nitrate-nitrogen, and suspended sediment (or total
nonfilterable residue) were detected at frequencies
from 76.9 to 99.8 percent in samples collected
from tributaries and Lake Erie in both countries.
32
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 15. Pollutant class, pollutant, percentage of samples with detected concentrations, number of
samples, number of sites, and number of sites within indicated range of samples per site, Lake
Erie basin tributaries in the United States: 1986-1996.
Percent
No. of Sites Within Indicated
Greater
Range of Samples per Sitea
Than
No.
Pollutant
Pollutant
Detection
No. of
of
10-
50-
100-
>
Class
(STORET pcode)
Limit
Samples3
Sites
1-9
49
99
500 500
Organochlorine
DDT (39300, 39310,
compounds
39320,39360, 39365,
39370)
11.2
596
93
88
4
0
1
0
Mirex (39500)
0.0
141
77
73
4
0
0
0
Chlordane (39350)
0.0
117
9
4
4
1
0
0
Dieldrin (39380)
23.6
199
93
88
4
1
0
0
PCBs (39488-39516,
0.1
1,112
89
79
5
1
4
0
34671, 81648, 81649)
PAHs
Benzo(a)pyrene (34247)
0.0
196
120
116
4
0
0
0
Trace metals
Mercury (71900)
17.4
3,197
312
228
74
2
8
0
Lead (01051)
46.2
10,433
1,141
972
120
30
19
0
Other pollutants
Atrazine (39632, 39033)
85.6
938
11
4
2
0
5
0
Nitrate-N (00630,00631)
94.6
32,607
1,417
1,181
153
32
38
13
Total phosphorus (00665)
95.5
35,078
1,435
1,175
162
44
41
13
Escherichia coli(31633,
99.8
1,503
35
9
16
7
3
0
31648;
Suspended sediment or
total nonfilterable residue
89.8
29,477
1,418
970
336
46
59
7
(00530, 70300, 80154)
Note: STORET, Storage and Retrieval system for environmental data in the United States; pcode, parameter code, a numeric label that
identifies a specific chemical compound, physical property, characteristic, or biological property and indicates how it was analyzed; >,
greater than; no., number.
Includes all observations reported as less than detected or with remark codes indicating the same.
Data are from the STORET database.
Basinwide, the number of sites with 10 or more
samples per site ranged from 263 for nitrate-N to
475 for suspended sediment. The number of sites
with 50 or more samples ranged from 107 for
nitrate-N to 136 for suspended sediment.
Basinwide, 58 sites showed 10 or more samples of
E. coli. Figure 18 shows geometric mean concen-
trations of total phosphorus in relation to criteria
developed by the International Joint Commission
(IJC), state of Ohio, and Ontario as eutrophication
benchmarks (Figure 18). Figure 19 shows geomet-
ric mean concentrations of nitrate-nitrogen. Geo-
metric mean concentrations of total phosphorus at
many sites (Figure 18) are above respective guide-
lines in agricultural and urban areas. Geometric
mean concentrations of nitrate-N (Figure 19) are
above 10 mg/L at several sites on streams that
serve as source waters for public supply. The
USEPA's Maximum Contaminant Level for drinking
water is 10 mg/L. Source waters containing con-
centrations of nitrate-N in excess of 10 mg/L should
be treated to reduce nitrates, or warnings should be
issued to consumers. Maps such as these can be
used to examine the spatial gradients and geo-
graphic patterns in the occurrence and distribution
of these compounds across the Lake Erie basin.
Table 17 presents data from samples collected by
Environment Canada from 1990 to 1996 at two sites
in the connecting channels-at the head of the St. Clair
River and at the outflow of Lake Erie at Fort Erie,
Ontario. The data for the dissolved and particulate
phases show that the frequency of detection of
these data varies from 0 to 100 percent (Table 17).
33
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 16. Pollutant class, pollutants, percentage of samples with detected concentrations, number of samples,
number of sites, and number of sites within indicated range of samples per site, Lake Erie Basin
tributaries in Ontario: 1986-1996.
Pollutant
Class
Pollutant
Percent
Greater
Than
Detection
Limit
No.
samples
No.
sites
Number of Sites Within Indicated
Range of Samples per Sitea
10- 5- 100-
49 99 500
Organochloine
DDT
0.07
2,673
5
0
1
1
2 1
compounds
Mi rex
0.0
850
5
1
1
1
1 1
Chlordane
0.0
976
5
0
2
0
2 1
Dieldrin
0.0
850
5
1
1
1
1 1
PCBs
0.2
899
5
0
2
1
1 1
PAHs
Benzo(a)pyrene
0.0
0
0
0
0
0
0 0
Trace metals
Mercury
15.2
1,253
4
0
0
1
3 0
Lead
14.6
2,334
19
2
2
9
6 0
Other
Atrazine
70.3
791
3
0
1
0
1 1
pollutants
Nitrate-N
97.6
3,534
29
2
3
11
12 1
Total phosphorus
99.8
3,408
29
2
3
11
13 0
Escherichia coli
76.9
338
27
5
22
0
0 0
Suspended sediment
98.0
3,383
29
1
4
12
12 0
or total nonfilterable
residue
Note: No., number; numbers of samples shown are for those sites located at downstream terminus of stream basin; >, greater than.
Includes all observations reported as less than detected or with remark codes indicating the same.
Data are from Ontario's Provincial Water-Quality Monitoring Network (PWQMN).
Table 17. Dissolved- and particulate-phase pollutants, number of samples, percentage of samples with
detected concentrations, detection limits, and number of samples per site; St. Clair River and
Niagara River at Fort Erie sampling sites: 1990-1996.
St. Clair River
Niagara River at Fort Erie
Dissolved Phase (Particulate Phase)
Dissolved Phase (Particulate Phase)
Percent >
Detection
Percent >
Detection
Number of
detection
limits
Number of
detection
limits
Contaminant1
samples
limit
ng/L (ng/g)a
samples
limit
ng/L (ng/g)a
PCBs
nd (78)
0 (27)
nd (77)
278 (287)
65 (11)
0.81 (89)
DDE
86 (78)
0 (56)
0.08 (5.6)
276 (291)
3 (24)
0.06 (6.4)
Mi rex
86 (78)
0 (0)
0.05 (4.3)
279 (287)
0 (0)
0.05 (4.4)
a-Chlordane
86 (78)
0 (0)
0.09 (2.3)
279 (287)
5 (5)
0.06 (2.9)
Benzo(a)pyrene
86 (78)
0 (0)
0.17 (30)
276 (287)
21 (38)
0.24 (161)
Mercury
36 (12)
11 (100)
5 (10)
126 (136)
34 (99)
5 (10)
Lead
99 (nd)
17 (nd)
200 (nd)
126 (nd)
41 (nd)
200 (nd)
Note: nd, no data.
Pollutants monitored but not shown in the table include dieldrin, anthracene, benz(a)anthracene,
benzofluoranthene, benzo(g,h,i)perylene, and fluoranthene.
'nanograms per liter are equivalent to parts per trillion; nanograms per gram are equivalent to parts per billion.
Data are from Environment Canada's ENVIRODAT database.
34
-------
Z± O
ST -Q
=
r* O
a>
3
CD
=5,
o
CD
SH
su
< i
(D
tfl
O
®
I-
fit
JT
«
03
sss
(A
Soale 1:2600,000
benzo(a)pyrene
(sarrples)
® Lessthan 10
o 10-49
© 50-99
• 100-500
* Greater than 500
o Faver than 25% of samples
above detection
/\/ State/Pra/inoe Boundary
'/\y Streams
Lckes
Lake Erie Basin
-------
w
05
Scale 1:2600, (XX)
10 0 10 2D 30 40 Mies
msrciry
(samples)
» Lessthan 10
o 10-49
o 50-99
• 100-500
m Greater than 500
o Faver than 25% of samples
above detection
/\/ State/Prcvince Boundary
Streams
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
o
~=
>
TO
£
E5
m
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
"D
X
O
o
XI
>
o
TO
>
7s
>
s
"O
-------
CO
-vl
oo
CQ O
E «>
Q. O
<2. 3
—¦ o
3 rf
CD
O
CD 3
^ O
Si) fi>
3
I §
® o
3- 2-
a I
<3 §
3
S o
A) r+
I °
Q_ Q)
IS
m 7j
—. 3"
CD O
CO
OO —
<7> 3
' v r+
to ="
CO CD
i-
&>
^r
CD
O"
as
(/>
o
o
3
"O
CD
Q_
C/>
CD_
CD
O
< i
®
Q.
Total phosphorus conosntrations
vs. gjidelines
Guidelines:
Vtestern Basin 0015 (EQ UC)
Central Basin 0.010 (EQ IJC)
Eastern Bssin 0.010 (EC, UC)
USStreams 0.050 (Ohio(PA)
Canadan Streams 0.090 (MOE)
• Less than guideline
o lx-2xgjideline
• IVbre than 2x guicfeline
/\/ State/Prcvince Boundary
/\y Streams
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
Soale 1:2600,000
o
HZ
>
5
5
>,
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
!—
I—
m
O
;H
o
-z.
~Q
O
O
>
o
7s
>
-------
to
00
(Q
CD
CD
O CD
a> cd
3 O
§¦ ®
§ o"
S 3
Er ®
® £}
o a>
<9
SS±
a 5-'
CD O
(/> cS
" ' CD
CD 3
OO O
<7> O
O
CD
CD
CD
^
S
«i
o'
3
(/)
=5.
a>
o
CD
=>
fi)
< i
CD
t/>
O
< i
zr
CD
I-
^T
CD
O"
(/)
Ntrate oorcentrdions (rrg/ L)
® 0.00-0.50
o 0.51-1.00
o 1.01 -5.00
® 5.01-10.0
® 10.1 -50.0
• 50.1-100
f~\/ Sde' Rcvince Eburdary
/\ SreaiTB
Lskes
LakeBieBasin
\
Stale 1:2,600,000
10 0 10 20 30 40 Mies
o
IE
>
TO
%
E5
rsi
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
~o
JO
o
o
73
>
o
JO
>
7s
>
s
"O
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Detection frequencies in the dissolved phase usually
were lower than those in the particulate phase. For
some pollutants, the ENVTRODAT database for the
connecting channels (Table 17) provided more
suitable data for computing concentration summary
statistics and for computing loads than did the
STORET andPWQMN databases (Tables 15 and
16). TheENVIRODAT database, however,
contained data for only two sites in the Lake Erie
basin and contained data for fewer pollutants than
did the STORET orPWQMN databases. A
comparison of the data from the St. Clair River and
Lake Erie at Fort Erie (inflow compared to outflow)
indicates that selected pollutants of concern are
detected more frequently at the outflow station than at
the inflow station.
For lakewide assessment purposes data must be
available from sites that are well distributed
throughout the basin. Concentration data for
total phosphorus and nitrate-N appear to meet
this criterion. The IJC has used extensive areal
and temporal total phosphorus data sets to
compute status and trends in total phosphorus
loads to Lake Erie and to evaluate the relative
contribution from point sources, the atmosphere,
and tributaries (Dolan, 1993). Data used by the
IJC to compute a total phosphorus budget were
obtained from the same sources as the data
described in Tables 5, 6, 15, and 16 and in
Figures 2 and 18.
Because of a discontinuation of tributary monitoring
for phosphorus at many sites between 1993 and
1996, the IJC identified the highest-priority tributar-
ies for monitoring annual total phosphorus loads
(Heidtke, 1999). The highest-priority tributaries
were identified as those with the largest or the most
variable annual loads. In Canada, the highest-
priority tributaries for monitoring total phosphorus
loads are the Grand, Sydenham, and Thames
Rivers. In the United States, the highest-priority
tributaries are the River Rouge in Michigan; the
Maumee, Sandusky, Cuyahoga, and Grand rivers in
Ohio; and the Cattaraugus Creek in New York
(Heidtke, 1999). Today, tributary monitoring for
total phosphorus is not being done at several of the
highest-priority tributaries in the Lake Erie basin.
Therefore, the quality of the total phosphorus load
estimates for Lake Erie after 1994 might not be as
reliable as the quality of estimates in the past.
Aquatic Sediments
Aquatic sediment quality is a useful indicator of
water quality for several reasons. First, aquatic
sediment concentrations of PCBs, organochlo-
rine pesticides, PAHs, and concentrations of
trace metals elevated above natural background
levels are a direct result of the presence of these
pollutants at some point in time in the overlying
water. Near-surface aquatic sediments, in par-
ticular, may indicate the recent history of con-
taminant loadings at a site. Further, the presence
of pollutants in near-surface sediments can
indicate a repository of pollutants available for
resuspension and transport to Lake Erie.
The second reason aquatic sediments are a good
indicator of water quality is that sediment
concentration data are less susceptible to prob-
lems associated with method detection limits
than are surface-water-quality data. Because
aquatic sediments adsorb several types of
pollutants on their surfaces, contaminant con-
centration or accumulation on sediments is
common where a source is releasing pollutants
to the aquatic environment. The detection
frequencies of organochlorine compounds,
PAHs, and trace metal pollutants in aquatic
sediments (Table 18) are markedly higher than
those in surface water (Tables 15-17). Pollutants
such as PCBs, PAHs, and mercury, which are
reported with few or no detections in surface water,
are reported at concentrations well above detection
limits at frequencies of 25 percent or more in
aquatic sediments (Table 18).
The third reason for the importance of sediment
data i s that over the period 1990 to 1997, there were
a larger number of sites with detections of pollutants in
aquatic sediments than in water (Table 18). Fourth,
39
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
sediment-quality assessment values such as thresh-
old effect levels (TELs) and probable effect levels
(PELs) are available for the evaluation of sediment
concentrations in relation to potential adverse
effects on aquatic life (Smith et al, 1996). The TEL
and PEL values developed by Smith et al. (1996)
define three ranges of chemical concentrations:
those that were (1) rarely, (2) occasionally, or
(3) frequently associated with adverse biological
effects. These guidelines were developed using a
weight of evidence approach in which matching
biological and chemical data from numerous model-
ing, laboratory, and field studies performed on
freshwater sediments were compiled and analyzed.
A TEL and a PEL were derived for 23 substances,
including eight trace elements, sixPAHs, total
PCBs, and eight organochlorine pesticides. This
method is being used as a basis for developing
national sediment-quality guidelines for freshwater
systems in Canada. It is also being used as part
of USEPA's Assessment and Remediation of
Contaminated Sediments (ARCS) program in the
Great Lakes.
Sediment concentrations are reported in milligrams
per kilogram (mg/kg), an equivalent to parts per
million, or in micrograms per kilogram (|ig/kg), an
equivalent to parts per billion.
In 1997 Environment Canada conducted a survey
of near-surface sediment contamination in Lake
Erie. USGS analyzed the near-surface sediment
contaminant data collected from 1990 to 1997 for
the U. S. portion of the basin (Rheaume et al.,
2000). Results of these studies were compared to
Canadian sediment quality guidelines (Smith et al.,
1996). Maps of these data for PCBs (Figure 20)
and mercury (Figure 21) show relative concentra-
tion ranges, areal distribution, and extent of con-
tamination. The data show that concentrations of
total PCBs in sediments collected from many
tributary and connecting channels sites are greater
than the PEL of0.277 mg/kg. There are several
areas where concentrations of mercury in sediments
are greater than the PEL of0.486 mg/kg. The data
also show that concentrations of PCBs and mercury
are lower in Lake Erie sediments compared to
connecting channel and tributary sediments, sug-
gesting sources within the basin. Compared to
PCBs, there appear to be fewer hotspots of
mercury-contaminated sediments in tributary and
connecting channels. The observed pattern suggests
connecting channel sources of mercury might be
important. Although the data can be useful for
source tracking, contaminant concentrations in
aquatic sediment cannot be converted readily into
contaminant loads because the maj or pathways are
unknown. Although most of the data in the National
Sediment Inventory (NSI; USEPA, 1997a) were
collected before 1994, theNSIis an additional
source of data on sediment quality.
Table 18. Number of samples and detection frequency of selected pollutants of concern in near surface
sediments: Lake Erie basin in the United States: 1990-1997.
Pollutant Class
Pollutants3
Number of
Samples
Frequency of
detection
Organochlorine compounds and
DDT
409
35.5
pesticides
Chlordane
371
7.81
Total PCBs
683
32.7
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons
Benzo(a)pyrene
388
32.7
Trace metals
Lead
615
99.8
Mercury
465
66.4
"All data for bioaccumulative and persistent pollutants identified in Table 2 were included in the original analysis. Nitrate-nitrogen,
total phosphorus, atrazine, and Escherichia coli are not contained in the aquatic sediment databases.
Compiled from Region 5 FIELDS database, OSI, National Sediment Inventory, and USGS National Water Quality Assessment
Program.
40
-------
o
o
(Q_
CD
"O C/>
° =3
O" =*
13
O
® O
m o
o
o
(D
§ £.
ro o
o «
32.
—I Q)
3 ~D
® o
7T m
CQ }*
to
to as
O JQ
«i
en
CD
Q.
3
CD
3
< i
w
o
Si
:*r
®
or
sa
(A
fD_
fit
Scale 1:^600,000
Srglesarrple PCB concentrations
in aquatic sediments (rrg^kgi
® 0-0.1
o 0.1-1
© 1-10
• 10-100
• 100-1000
• 1000- 50,000
/'¦\/ State/Prcvince Boundary
Streams
Lakes
Lake Erie Basin
o
HZ
>
£
EE
M
>,
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
!—
I—
m
O
;H
o
~Q
O
O
>
o
7D
>
7s
>
"O
-------
«3
€0
K»
Ef <£?.
m 3'
¦d"
3 ?
CJ-
5t SJ
i: 3
© "2.
m ®
s5 8
o o
O 3
*~ o
i— ro
o
fis
^r
CD
O"
(/)
CD
fli
< 1
o'
3
< 1
o
IVkciry ocrceritrdions i n
ssdimerts (rrg/k
TO
%
E5
rsi
>
0
1
>
o
0
1
o
o
o
o
z
~o
JO
o
o
73
>
o
70
>
7s
>
2
"O
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Fish Tissue
EPA developed the NSI (USEPA, 1997a) to
identify the national extent and severity of
sediment and fish-tissue contamination. The
minimum data requirements for including data
in the NSI were location information, sampling
date, and measured units. NSI reports contain
results relevant to the Lake Erie basin from
samples collected from 1980 to 1993 and re-
trieved from STORET and the databases of
USACE, USGS, EPA, NO A A, and states bor-
dering Lake Erie. Table 19 shows fish-tissue
pollutants in the Lake Erie basin at approxi-
mately 479 sampling sites from the most con-
taminated areas (USEPA, 1997b) in relation to
guidelines for wildlife consumption (NAS/NAE,
1973). The fish species from which tissue
samples were obtained for subsequent analysis
were not reported. Data are shown for five
selected pollutants of concern. Contaminant
concentrations in fish tissue are reported in
micrograms per kilogram.
Precipitati position
Atmospheric deposition has been identified as a
significant source of many pollutants, including
nutrients and bioaccumulative and persistent pollut-
ants banned or restricted in the United States and
Canada. The control of these atmospheric sources
is complicated by the difficulty in identifying and
tracking the original sources and estimating the
magnitude of the deposition. Atmospheric deposi-
tion is computed by multiplying pollutant concentra-
tions by rainfall and dryfall amounts.
Deposition of PCBs appears to be uniform across the
Great Lakes basin. However, the relative impor-
tance of the atmosphere as a source for PCBs
differs from lake to lake based on the ratio of lake
surface area to drainage area. EPA has estimated
that as much as 90 percent of PCB loadings to
Lake Superior result from atmospheric deposition
(USEPA, 1997c). Comparatively, PCB inputs from
the atmosphere were estimated to be only 7 percent
of the total input to Lake Erie (Strachan and
Eisenreich, 1988). Both wet and dry deposits
contain trace elements such as arsenic, cadmium,
lead, and selenium, and the PAHs
benzo(k)fluoranthene andbenzo(a)pyrene. An
increasing trend in wet deposition of PAHs from
Lake Superior to Lake Ontario mirrors the gradient
of human population density. Among the Great
Lakes, Lake Erie is thought to receive the highest
Table 19. Summary of National Sediment Inventory data for selected pollutants in fish tissue by pollutant class,
pollutant, number of tissue samples, and median concentration: 1980-1993.
No. of
Tissue
Samples
Median
NAS/NAE Recommended
Pollutant
Pollutant
Concentration
Maximum Whole-Fish
Class
(STORET pcode)
(MQ/kg)
Concentration for the Protection
of Fish-Eating Wildlife (ng/kg)
Organochlorine
Chlordane: cis isomer
101
20
100
pesticides
(39063, 79005)
DDD, DDE, DDT
162
98
1,000
(81896, 81897,
39290)
Organochlorine
PCBs (19136, 19141,
163
2,480
500
Compounds
19153, 19157, 19160,
19165, 19170, 39525)
Trace metals
Lead (71934)
16
203
na
Mercury (71933)
37
52
500
Notes: STORET, data storage and retrieval system for environmental data in the United States; pcode, parameter code, a numeric
label that identifies a specific chemical compound, physical property or characteristic, or biological property and indicates how it was
analyzed; |jg/kg, micrograms per kilogram; na, not applicable; No., number
NAS/NAE, National Academy of Science/National Academy of Engineering, 1973
43
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
deposition of PAHs, lead, arsenic, and selenium
through dry deposition.
The gas transfer component is a significant propor-
tion of the total loading of pollutants to the Great
Lakes. The concentrations of certain chemicals in
the atmosphere are in equilibrium with lake concen-
trations. At equilibrium, annual losses from volatil-
ization equal annual gains from deposition. For
example, in 1993-1994, volatilization from the Great
Lakes was estimated to exceed deposition, resulting
in a net loss of chemicals to the atmosphere
(USEPA, 1997c).
Through the Integrated Atmospheric Deposition
Network (IADN), concentrations in rainfall,
vapor phase, and dryfall (particulate) are col-
lected in the United States and Canada. IADN
monitors organochlorine compounds and other
selected organic pollutants. The IADN program
has one master station, near Buffalo, and four
Canadian satellite stations in the Lake Erie basin.
The IADN reports wet and dry deposition of many
organic pollutants of concern to the Lake Erie
basin, and their gas transfer components.
The Mercury Deposition Network (MDN)
monitors mercury in rainfall at more than 25
sites in the United States and at 5 sites in
Canada. The MDN is part of the U. S. National
Atmospheric Deposition Program (NADP). The
MDN began in 1995 with 13 sites; by 1998 it
had expanded to more than 30 sites, including
one at Sturgeon Point, New York, in the Lake Erie
basin. The objective of the MDN is to develop a
national database of weekly concentrations of total
mercury in precipitation and the seasonal and annual
flux of total mercury in wet deposition. The data are
available at the URL http://nadp.sws.uiuc.edu. The
IADN and MDN are joint ventures between the
United States and Canada.
The latest atmospheric deposition results from the
IADN, described by Hoff and others (1996),
include recent mercury deposition results. Of the
available databases inventoried for this report, only
the IADN's and MDN's database were designed
to measure contaminant loads. Table 20 presents a
summary of the available IADN data from the
Sturgeon Point master station. Both the number and
the percentage of samples greater than the detection
limit are described for the particulate phase, vapor
phase, and precipitation for a number of pollutants
of concern.
Loading estimates of both atmospheric deposition
to and volatilization from Lake Erie of pollutants of
concern have shown the lake is very sensitive to
atmospheric concentrations. IADN data indicate
that many pollutants of concern might come from
outside the Great Lakes basin, while some other
anthropogenic substances of concern, such as
PAHs and trace elements, come from sources in
the basin. For example, the Great Lakes Binational
Toxics Strategy Pesticide Report (USEPA, 1998)
contains information on the potential for long-
term transport and deposition of toxaphene and
p,p'-DDT.
1 ifS
Pathways are environmental processes that link
contaminant sources to receptors like sediment
or biota. Hydroclimatic pathways include
atmospheric deposition. Fluvial pathways
include transport of pollutants from streams and
connecting channels to Lake Erie. Aquatic
sediment pathways include physical reactions
such as adsorption, desorption, deposition, and
resuspension. The relative magnitude and
importance of selected pathways cannot be as-
sessed without adequate environmental and ancil-
lary data to characterize contaminant concentrations
and loads and ancillary data on processes, rates,
constants, and pollutant kinetics.
Information on pathways is useful it because
provides information about where, when, how, and
why a contaminant reaches the level of being
identified as a critical pollutant in Lake Erie. It is
apparent that sediment and fish tissue concentra-
tions of PCBs and mercury are higher than surface-
44
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Table 20. Summary of available IADN data by pollutant and phase, Lake Erie at Sturgeon Point, New York; 1993.
Particulate Phase
Vapor
Phase
Precipitation
DL
No. of
%>
DL No. of
%>
DL
No. of
%>
Pollutant3
pg/m3
Samples
DL
pg/m3 Samples
DL
ng/L
samples
DL
PCBs
7.5
11
45
96.8
29
90
0.38
13
92
y-Chlordane
0.4
11
55
1.8
31
100
0.03
13
92
a-Chlordane
0.1
11
18
2.1
31
94
0.02
13
38
Mi rex
0.5
11
9
0.4
31
26
0.07
13
0
DDT
0.6
11
82
2.4
31
87
0.08
13
77
DDD
0.005
11
73
0.8
31
71
0.14
13
8
DDE
0.3
11
55
1.0
31
100
0.02
13
100
Dieldrin
2.1
11
73
2.7
31
97
0.01
13
85
a-HCH
1.8
11
18
2.2
31
100
0.14
13
92
y-HCH
0.9
11
27
2.0
31
100
0.02
13
69
Hexachlorobenzene
6.2
11
0
5.7
31
100
0.25
13
0
Acenaphthene
8.5
11
0
38.7
30
97
0.7
12
8
Acenaphthylene
8.0
11
0
28.5
30
63
1.6
12
8
Anthracene
4.0
11
45
8.8
30
50
0.8
12
42
Benz(a)anthracene
2.7
11
100
1.2
30
20
0.2
12
100
Benzo(b)fluoranthene
7.8
11
100
1.2
30
10
0.2
12
100
Benzo(k)fluoranthene
2.0
11
100
3.7
30
0
0.4
12
100
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene
2.8
11
100
1.2
30
0
0.4
12
83
Benzo(a)pyrene
1.8
11
100
13.5
30
0
0.3
12
100
Chrysene
10.7
11
100
3.7
30
77
0.7
12
100
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene
3.5
11
64
3.7
30
0
0.7
12
25
Fluoranthene
30.9
11
100
31.4
30
97
0.4
12
100
Fluorene
15.6
11
9
24.8
30
100
0.8
12
83
lndeno(123-cd)pyrene
3.5
11
100
2.4
30
0
0.3
12
92
Phenanthrene
15.7
11
100
70.1
30
97
0.5
12
100
Pyrene
19.1
11
100
20.1
30
97
0.3
12
100
Notes: DL, detection limit; %, percent; No., number; pg/m , picogram per cubic meter; ng/L, nanogram per liter.
Nanograms per liter and picograms per cubic meter are both equivalent to parts per trillion.
aPollutants monitored but not included in table are lead, cadmium, and arsenic.
Data from integrated Atmospheric Deposition Network (IADN) database.
water concentrations. Selected data shown in
Figures 20 and 21 suggest that aquatic sediments in
tributaries and connecting channels may be a
repository for mercury and PCBs. These near-
surface sediments appear to be available for
transport to Lake Erie from tributaries and connect-
ing channels with uptake indicated in fish (Table
19). Sufficient data exist to identify aquatic sedi-
ments as a potentially important pollutant source to
the Lake Erie system. Resuspension of pollutants
from aquatic sediments, subsequent transport to the
lake, and uptake by biota appear to be important
pathways.
45
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
48
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Suitability of Available Data
The suitability of the available data for charac-
terizing concentrations and for estimating loads
of pollutants to Lake Erie varies widely. Tribu-
tary and point source data for pollutants repre-
senting classes of organochlorine compounds,
polynuclear aromatic compounds, and trace
metals were almost always reported below
detection in surface water at rates of 50 percent
or greater. Additionally, the detection levels
widely used are well above those considered
environmentally relevant to the water medium. As
a result, few sample concentrations were reported
above detection for the trace metals, orga-
nochlorine, and polynuclear aromatic hydrocar-
bon compounds investigated for this report.
When pollutants were detected in sufficient
numbers of samples, there were usually an
insufficient number of locations to characterize
concentrations or to estimate loads for lakewide
assessment purposes. Atmospheric loading data
for organochlorine compounds, PAHs , and trace
metals are the only data readily available and
consistently collected for the purpose of com-
puting deposition or loading from the atmosphere.
The available water quality data for atrazine,
nitrate-nitrogen, total phosphorus, and sus-
pended sediment can be used to characterize
concentrations and may be suitable to compute
loads to Lake Erie from tributaries. Nutrient
data (nitrogen and phosphorus) are available
from almost all data sources inventoried for this
report. These data are available in sufficient
amounts, the pollutants are commonly detected
at environmentally relevant concentrations, and
the studies are characterized by sampling sites
covering a wide geographic area. These data
may be suitable for constructing a loading
model or for evaluating environmental concen-
trations in relation to existing water quality
standards and criteria or criteria under develop-
ment. Frequently, these data are accompanied by
the necessary ancillary data for streamflow or
discharge volume necessary for the computation
of a load. Before computing concentration
summary statistics or loads, the sample-collec-
tion and analysis methods should to be reviewed
to further establish data comparability. This step
was beyond the scope of this report.
The deficiency in quality and quantity of data
for point source and surface-water contaminant
concentrations for organochlorine compounds,
PAHs, and trace metals can be attributed to
several factors. The first factor is the past use of
methods that do not meet current quality assur-
ance and quality control specifications for
sampling in the part per billion and part per
trillion concentration ranges. The second factor
is that the methods of collection and analysis
used from 1986 to 1996 were not sufficiently
sensitive for measuring the range of low-level
concentrations now currently known to persist
in the water environment. The third factor is that
the cost of analyzing these pollutants is high
compared to the cost of analyzing the more
commonly detected pollutants like nitrate-N and
total phosphorus. Because of the high cost of
analysis, a relatively small number of samples
for organochlorine compounds, PAHs, and trace
elements have been collected and analyzed over
the past 20 years in the Lake Erie basin. Data
sets containing virtually no detections or a small
number of samples are of limited use for charac-
terizing concentrations and loads.
Implementation of the GLI in the United States
will require that the technology for monitoring
be improved so that pollutants such as PCBs and
mercury will be analyzed in effluents and water
at environmentally relevant concentrations.
Widespread improvements in monitoring will
take years to implement as changes to permit
reporting requirements are updated periodically,
after every 5 years or more. While programs to
47
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
reduce concentrations and loads of toxic and
persistent substances from point source dis-
charges are being undertaken, better information
on the response of the Lake Erie system to these
management actions will be useful for measuring
success. However, the ability to measure this
success is difficult to document under current
monitoring programs, which lack the resources to
be effective for characterizing sources and loads.
Aquatic sediments and biota tend to concentrate
pollutants so that the data derived from samples
analyzed in the mid to late 1980s might be
comparable to data collected in the 1990s. The
methods used 10 to 15 years ago might be
sufficiently sensitive by current standards to
meet data quality objectives for detecting envi-
ronmental concentrations present in aquatic
sediments and biota. The aquatic sediment
concentration data for pollutants are likely to
meet current data quality objectives for evaluat-
ing exposure effects on aquatic life, and the fish
residue data are useful for evaluating the expo-
sure and risk to human and wildlife health from
consumption. Both of these data sources can be
used to evaluate the extent and magnitude of
beneficial use impairments. These data also can
be used to compare the extent and magnitude of
contamination in Areas of Concern. These
comparisons can be used to make management
decisions about the areas most in need of
remediation. In addition, these data can be used
with contaminant release data from TRI, NPRI,
PCS, and SRDS to formulate weight of evidence
approaches to identifying and characterizing
major sources. Specifically, location data for
point sources and contaminant releases are
valuable as an indicator of where to look for a
signature of environmental contamination. Data
for concentrations of pollutants in aquatic
sediments, biota, and pollutant releases can
serve as a guide for source track-down and
pollution prevention when used together and
interpreted as multiple lines of evidence.
Data to characterize the most important pollut-
ant pathways must meet or exceed the criteria
established to characterize concentrations and
loads from point sources, the atmosphere,
tributaries, connecting channels, and aquatic
sediments and to address the subsequent effects
on aquatic life and human health. Use of inap-
propriate or incomplete data can result in flawed
decisions based on incomplete or incorrect
information. A long-term goal might be to
determine the relative importance of pathways
and sources to virtually eliminate certain pollut-
ants. Given the inadequacy of data for character-
izing concentrations and loads for
bioaccumulative and persistent pollutants,
however, most pathways cannot now be deter-
mined with any confidence. The lack of support-
ing data to indicate the relative importance of
the major pathways suggests a major effort will
be needed to fill this data gap.
48
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Conclusions and Future Direction
This document characterizes the information
available from the public sector and research
laboratories in digital databases and the suitabil-
ity of these data for identifying sources and
characterizing pollutant concentrations and
loads. The data search included all the Lake Erie
chemicals of concern listed in Table 2, with a
particular emphasis on analyzing and presenting
the data for PCBs and mercury, the two chemi-
cals designated as Lake Erie critical pollutants.
In the databases reviewed for information from
the reporting period 1986 to 1996, data charac-
teristics examined included contributing agency,
media code, parameter code, location by latitude
and longitude, sampling and analysis frequen-
cies, period of record, detection limits, number
of observations, number of observations above
the detection limits, concentration, units of
measure, and availability of flow or other
ancillary data. Fourteen major environmental
databases representing contributions from 10
national, 10 state and provincial, four binational,
and two nongovernmental monitoring programs
were examined. Databases evaluated for the
United States were STORET, PCS, TRI, OSI,
FIELDS, NSI, and USGS. Databases evaluated
for Canada were STAR, ENVIRODAT,
PWQMN, SRDS, and NPRI. Binational net-
works evaluated were IADN and MDN.
This report draws the following conclusions
from an analysis of these databases and data:
1. The data obtained from 11 of the 14 major
databases in the Lake Erie basin were, in
part, considered to be either of insufficient
quality and quantity or not applicable to
characterize concentrations and loads for
tributary, lake, or point source concentra-
tions or annual loads to Lake Erie within
acceptable levels of uncertainty. These
results apply for DDT and its degradates,
chlordane and its degradates, aldrin, dield-
rin, PCBs, dioxin, PAHs, arsenic, copper,
mercury, and zinc.
2. Data from the IADN and MDN were found
to be of sufficient quality and quantity to
estimate summary statistics for concentra-
tions and to compute annual deposition to
Lake Erie for organochlorine compounds,
mercury, and PAHs. These two networks
represent only the atmospheric contribution
of these pollutants.
3. Concentration data for nitrate-nitrogen, total
phosphorus, suspended sediment, and
atrazine from all applicable databases might
be adequate for characterizing tributary and
point source concentrations and loads to
Lake Erie. Data for Escherichia coli can be
used to characterize summary statistics for
concentrations in selected tributary and
nearshore areas. Another use of these data is
to compare ambient concentrations to water
quality criteria, standards, and guidelines.
This approach would provide an estimate of
the potential exposure of aquatic life and
humans to these pollutants and the resulting
effects. However, none of these chemicals
are bioaccumulative and most are not as
persistent in the environment as organochlo-
rine pesticides, PCBs, PAHs, and trace
metals.
4. Concentration data for aquatic bed sedi-
ments and fish tissue were less susceptible
to the limitations of quality and quantity
than data reported for surface water. Al-
though not suitable for computing loads,
these data could provide a strong indication
of the extent and severity of contamination
in the Lake Erie basin. Those areas with the
highest sediment concentrations can be
identified and used to evaluate the potential
for adverse effects on aquatic life and
49
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
human health by comparison to both sediment
and fish consumption advisory guidelines.
5. The existing concentration data for bed
sediments, fish tissue, point sources, the
lake, connecting channels, and tributaries,
coupled with location data, can be used to
indicate areas of both historical contamina-
tion and potential sources or source areas.
This information can be useful to managers
to prioritize remedial actions to reduce or
eliminate loads.
6. Because the decision to seek virtual elimi-
nation of persistent toxic substances already
has been made, and given the relative
inadequacy of existing data to compute
loads for these pollutants, it might be more
productive to pursue other methods to
identify the major sources and pathways of
critical pollutants in Lake Erie.
7. Past and present agricultural, industrial, and
municipal activities are sources of pollut-
ants in Lake Erie. The weight of evidence
from the physical location of these activi-
ties, their potential chemical impacts, and
the known chemical impacts in the water
and sediments as determined by comparison
to guidelines suggests the basin as a whole,
and in particular the western portion, is a
stressed environment.
The next step is to identify sources and provide
a scientific basis for sound management deci-
sions. Known point sources can be identified
from the data compiled for this report. Maps of
discharge locations, pesticide use, agricultural
areas, abandoned landfill sites, and other land
uses will be compared to ambient water column
concentrations, aquatic biota tissue concentra-
tions, and sediment concentrations to identify
major source areas and the most highly contami-
nated areas in the lake. An assessment of
whether the most contaminated areas and major
sources already have been targeted for priority
action may be accomplished by identifying and
cross-referencing implementation and
remediation actions already under way. The
Lake Erie Areas of Concern RAP sites have
already been identified as priority areas for
source control and remediation. This exercise
not only will further confirm the RAP sites as
priority areas, but also will point out additional
areas where further action or attention might be
needed, whether it be monitoring, additional
research, or remediation.
Several efforts independent of the Lake Erie
LaMP are under way and may contribute to
tracking down sources. The Binational USEPA/
Environment Canada Toxics Reduction Strategy
is investigating sources of pollutants of concern
to the Great Lakes both within and outside the
basin. This strategy is designed to further iden-
tify sources and develop and implement the
actions needed to move closer to the goal of
virtual elimination of persistent toxic substances
from the Great Lakes. Several contaminated
sediment and landfill remediation projects
recently were completed or are under way in the
River Raisin, Ashtabula River, and Ottawa
River/Maumee Areas of Concern. Another
project under way by the Sources and Loads
Subcommittee is the review of these programs
and other individual government agency pro-
grams to create a report documenting the status
of pollution prevention and reduction activities
throughout the Lake Erie basin, particularly for
mercury and PCBs.
The ambient concentrations of critical pollutants
in all media must be analyzed compared to the
GLWQA specific objectives listed in Annex 1,
and possibly other more recent objectives (i.e.,
Great Lakes Initiative). This analysis must
assess the potential of certain chemicals to cause
impairment and ensure a thorough evaluation of
sources and potential critical pollutants. Se-
lected data examined for this report could be
used for these purposes.
50
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Other steps related to the completion of Stage 1
could be completed if desired, but it is unlikely
these additional data would result in much-
improved basinwide assessment conclusions.
The resulting load estimates for selected
bioaccumulative and persistent pollutants still
would be highly uncertain because of the many
assumptions that would be needed to compute
loads. A partial literature review conducted by
the Sources and Loads Subcommittee suggests
that Lake Erie studies conducted for purposes
other than calculating loads might provide useful
information for only a small number of pollutants
or for a limited number of source areas.
There is no question that Lake Erie is in flux. To
better understand pathways of critical pollutants,
additional research is needed on changes in food
web dynamics and the linkages in energy and
flow between the lake bottom and the water
column. For example, concentrations in fish
have fluctuated over the years, even as point and
nonpoint source loads appear to have decreased.
Is this a reflection of food web changes, impact
from exotic species, climate change, or some-
thing else? Although it might be possible to
further decrease loads into the lake, it is also
important to understand what is happening to
the pollutants already in the lake. Once the
major sources of pollutants and the most seri-
ously contaminated areas have been identified, it
is recommended that resources and remedial
actions be focused on those areas immediately
rather than spent on further attempts to estimate
total loads.
51
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
52
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
References
Baker, D.B., F.G. Calhoun, and Gerald Matisoff.
1998. The Lake Erie Agricultural Systems
for Environmental Quality Project. Fact
Sheet. Heidelberg College Water-Quality
Laboratory, The Ohio State University,
Columbus, Ohio, and Case Western Reserve
University, Cleveland, Ohio. 2 p.
Barber, L.B., J. A. Leenheer, W.E. Pereira, T.I.
Noyes, G.K Brown, C.F. Tabor, and J.H.
Writer. 1995. Organic contamination of the
Mississippi River from Municipal and
Industrial Wastewater. U.S. Geological
Survey Circular 1133. U.S. Geological
Survey, Reston, Virginia.
Canviro Consultants. 1988. Thirty-seven mu-
nicipal water pollution control plants-Pilot
Monitoring Study, Volumes 1 and 2. Pre-
pared for the Water Resources Branch,
Ontario Ministry of Environment, under
the MIS A program.
Casey, G.D., Myers, D.N., Finnegan, D.P, and
Wieczorek, M.E., 1997, National Water-
Quality Assessment of the Lake Erie-Lake
St. Clair Basin, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio,
Pennsylvania, and New York-Environmen-
tal and Hydrologic Setting: Water-Resources
Investigations Report 97-4256, p. 33-49.
Canada Ontario Agreement (COA). 1996.
Objective 2.1: Confirmation of Zero Dis-
charge of priority pesticides in Ontario.
Environment Canada-Ontario Region and
Ontario Ministry of Environment and
Energy. Toronto, ON.
Cohen, A.C. 1959. Simplified estimators of the
normal distribution when samples are singly
censored or truncated.
Technometrics 1: p. 213-217.
Cohn, T.A. 1988. Adjusted Maximum
Liklihood Estimation of the Moments of
Lognormal Populations from Type 1 Cen-
sored Samples. U.S. Geological Survey
Open File Report 88-350. United States
Geological Survey, 34 p.
.1995. Recent Advances in Statistical
Methods for the Estimation of Sediment and
Nutrient Transport in Rivers. Reviews of
Geophysics, Supplement, July 1995,
p. 1117-1123.
Cohn, T.A., D.L.Caulder, E.J.Gilroy, L.D.
Zynjuk, andR.M. Summers. 1992. The
validity of a simple statistical model for
estimating fluvial constituent loads: An
empirical study involving nutrient loads
entering the Chesapeake Bay. Water-
Resources Research 28: p. 2353-2363
Cohn, T.A., L.L. DeLong, E.J. Gilroy, R.M.
Hirsch, and D.K. Wells. 1989. Estimating
Constituent Loads. Water-Resources
Research 25: p. 937-942.
Daigger, G.T., and J.A. Buttz. 1992. Upgrading
Wastewater Treatment Plants.
Dolan, D.M. 1993. Point source loadings of
phosphorus to Lake Erie, 1986-1990: Journal
of Great Lakes Research, v. 19, p. 212-223.
Durell, G., and R. Lizotte. 1998. PCB levels at
26 New York City and New Jersey WPCPs
that discharge to the New York/New Jersey
Harbor Estuary. Env. Sci. and Tech.
32: p.1022.1031.
Eganhouse, R. P., and I.R. Kaplan, 1985. Alpha-
tocopheryl acetate as an indicator of munici-
pal waste contamination in the environment.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 19(3): p. 282-285.
Eisenreich, S.J., and W.M.J. Strachan. 1992.
Estimating Atmospheric Deposition of Toxic
pollutants to the Great Lakes: an Update.
Workshop held at Canadian Centre for
Inland Waters, Burlington Ontario.
Jan 31-Feb 2. 1992.
53
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Environment Canada. 1993. Organic pollutants
in the Great Lakes 1986-1990. Report #
EQB/IWD-OR/93-02-I. Environment
Canada-Ontario Region. Burlington.
Fikslin, T.Jog, andR.W. Greene. 1998. Study of
the Loadings of Poly chlorinated Biphenyls
from Tributaries and Point Sources dis-
charging to the tidal Delaware River.
Delaware River Basin Commission.
West Trenton, New Jersey.
Folmar, L.C. N.D. Denslow, V.Rao, M. Chow,
D.A. Crain, J. Enblom, J. Marcino and L.J.
Guillette. 1996. Vitellogenin Induction and
reduced serum testosterone concentrations in
feral male carp (Cyprinus carpio) captured
near a major metropolitan sewage treatment
plant. Environmental Health Perspectives.
104(10): p. 1096-1101.
Foran, J. A. 1991. The Control of Discharges of
Toxic pollutants into the Great Lakes and
their Tributaries: Development of Bench-
marks. IJC, Windsor, Ontario.
Fuhrer, G.J., Gilliom, R.J., Hamilton, PA.,
Morace, J.L., Nowell, L.J., RInella, J.F.,
Stoner, J.D., and Wentz, D.A., 1999, The
quality of our Nation's waters: U.S. Geologi-
cal Survey Circular 1225, p. 46-47.
Gleit, A. 1985. Estimation for small normal
data sets with detection limits. Environ.
Science and Technology 19: p. 1201-1206.
Gianessi, L.P, and J.E. Anderson. 1995. Pesti-
cide Use in Illinois Crop Production. Na-
tional Center for Food and Agricultural
Policy, Washington, DC.
1995. Pesticide Use in Indiana Crop
Production. National Center for Food and
Agricultural Policy, Washington, DC.
1995. Pesticide Use in Michigan Crop
Production. National Center for Food and
Agricultural Policy, Washington, DC.
1995. Pesticide Use in Minnesota Crop
Production. National Center for Food and
Agricultural Policy, Washington, DC.
1995. Pesticide Use in New York Crop
Production. National Center for Food and
Agricultural Policy, Washington, DC.
1995. Pesticide Use in Ohio Crop
Production. National Center for Food and
Agricultural Policy, Washington, DC.
1995. Pesticide Use in Pennsylvania
Crop Production. National Center for Food
and Agricultural Policy, Washington, DC.
1995. Pesticide Use in Wisconsin Crop
Production. National Center for Food and
Agricultural Policy, Washington, DC.
Government of Canada. 1991. Toxic Chemicals
in the Great Lakes and Associated Effects.
Environment Canada, Department of
Fisheries and Oceans and Health and
Welfare Canada.
Heidtke, T.M., in press, Estimating annual
phosphorus loads to Lake Erie: Insights for
future monitoring, Presented at the 42nd
Annual Conference on Great Lakes
Research, Cleveland, Ohio, May 25, 1999.
Helsel, D.R., andR.M. Hirsch. 1993. Statistical
Methods in Water Resources. Elsevier, New
York, New York. p. 357-440.
Hoff, R.M., W.M.J. Strachan, C.W. Sweet, C.H.
Chan, M. Shackleton, T.F. Bidleman, K.A.
Brice, D.A. Burniston, pollutants. Cussion,
D.F. Gatz, K. Harlin, and W.H. Schroeder.
1996. Atmospheric deposition of toxic
chemicals to the Great Lakes: A review of
data through 1994. Atmospheric Environ-
ment v. 30: p. 3505-3527.
Horstmann, M. and M. McLachlan. 1995.
Concentrations of polychlorinated dibenzo-
p-dioxins (PCDD) and dibenzofurans
(PCDF) in urban runoff and household
waters. Chemosphere. v. 31: p. 2887-2896.
54
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
International Joint Commission. 1991. Cleaning
up the Great Lakes: A Report from the
Water Quality Board to the IJC on Toxic
Substances in the Great Lakes Basin. 46 p.
Iman, R.L., and W.J. Conover. 1984. A Modern
Approach to Statistics. John Wiley and
Sons, New York, New York. p. 1-29.
Larson, S.J., Capel, P.D., and Majewski, M.S.,
1997, Pesticides in surface waters; distribution,
trends, and governing factors: v. 3 of the series
Pesticides in the Hydrologic System, Chelsea,
Michigan, Ann Arbor Press, p. 184-208
Lee, H.B., and T.E. Peart. 1995. Determination
of 4-Nonylphenol in Effluent and Sludge
from Sewage Treatment Plants. Analytical
Chemistry. V. 67: p. 1976-1980.
Lee, H.B., J. Weng, T.E. Peart, and R.J.
Maguire. 1998. Occurrence of Alkyl-
phenoxyacetic Acids in Canadian Sewage
Treatment Plant Effluents. Water Qual. Res.
J. Canada. V. 33: p. 19-29.
Makepeace, D.K., D.W. Smith, and S.J. Stanley.
1995. Urban Storm water Quality: Summary
of data. Critical Reviews in Environment
Science and Technology, v. 25 n. 2: p. 93-139.
Marsalek, J., and H.O. Schroeter. 1984. Load-
ings of selected toxic substances in urban
runoff in the Canadian Great Lakes Basin.
Unpublished report, Hydraulics Division.
National Water Research Institute.
Burlington, Ontario.
MOE. 1993. Candidates for Bans and Phase-
outs. Ontario Ministry of Environment and
Energy. Toronto.
1994. Water Quality data Ontario Lakes
and Streams 1990. Volume 26. Ontario
Ministry of Environment and Energy. Toronto.
Monteith, H.D. 1987. Fluctuations of trace
pollutants in sewage treatment plants. In:
Canadian Association of Water Pollution
Research and Control Monograph Series on
Advances in Water Pollution Research and
Technology. #1. Edited by H. Melcer. Envi-
ronment Canada. Burlington Ontario.
National Academy of Sciences and National
Academy of Engineering, 1973, Water
Quality Criteria, 1972 (Blue Book): U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Ecologi-
cal Research Series.
OMAFRA. 1994. Survey of Pesticide Use in
Ontario, 1993. Ontario Ministry of Agri-
culture, Food, and Rural Affairs, Toronto,
Ontario.
Richards, R.P In press. Estimation of Loads in
Rivers and Streams: A Guidance Document
for NPS Programs, Report to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency-Region
VIII. Heidelberg College Water Quality
Laboratory, Tiffin, Ohio. 134 p.
Schroeter and Associates. 1992. Loadings of
Toxic pollutants from urban nonpoint sources
to the Great Lakes from Ontario Communities.
Final report prepared for Environment Canada
with funding from the Federal Government
Great Lakes Action Plan Cleanup Fund.
Contract # KE405-0-2069.
Smith, S.L., MacDonald, D.D., Keenleyside,
K.A., Ingersoll, C.G., and Field, L.J., 1996,
A preliminary evaluation of sediment quality
assessment values for freshwater ecosystems:
J. Great Lakes Res., v. 22, n. 3, p. 624-638.
Smith, S.L., MacDonald, D.D., Keenleyside,
K.A., and Gaudet, C.L., 1996, The develop-
ment and implementation of Canadian
sediment quality guidelines, Developments
and progress in sediment quality assessment:
V. 1, Rationale, challenges, techniques and
strategies, Ecovision World Monograph
Series, The Netherlands, In Press.
SOLEC. 1995a. Nutrients: Trends and Status.
Environment Canada and U.S. Environmen-
tal Protection Agency. EPA 905-R-95-015
55
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
1995b. Toxic pollutants in the Great
Lakes. Environment Canada and U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA 905-R-95-016.
Sources and Loadings Subcommittee. Undated.
Draft Program Inventory, 33 p. with addi-
tional appendices.
Strachan, W.J. and S.J. Eisenreich. 1988. Mass
balancing of toxic chemicals in the Great
Lakes: The role of atmospheric deposition.
International Joint Commission, Interna-
tional Air Quality Advisory Board, Work-
shop on the estimation of atmospheric
loadings of toxic chemicals to the Great
Lakes basin, October 29-31, 1986.
Tam, E., and M. Diamond. In press. Persistent
Organic pollutants in the Lake Erie Water-
shed: Emerging Issues and a Conceptual
Budget for the Urban Environment. Lake
Erie at the Millennium—Changes, Trends
and Trajectories. Great Lakes Institute for
Environmental Research, Windsor, Ontario.
Ternes, T. A. In press. Occurrence of drugs in
German sewage treatment plants and rivers.
Water Research.
USDA. 1998. Toledo Harbor Pilot Project Final
Report. United States Department of Agri-
culture, Natural Resources Conservation
Service, Columbus, Ohio. 65 p.
USEPA. 1983. Final Report of the Nationwide
Urban Runoff Program. NTIS No. PB 84-
18-5552. US Environmental Protection
Agency, Water Planning Division. Washing-
ton, DC.
1990. Suspended, Cancelled, and Re-
stricted Pesticides. Pesticides and Toxic
Substances, p. 17-1002.
1997a. The Incidence and Severity of
Sediment Contamination in Surface Waters
of the United States. Volume 1: National
Sediment Quality Survey. EPA 823-R-97-
006. US Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Science and Technology. Washing-
ton, DC.
1997b. The Incidence and Severity of
Sediment Contamination in Surface Waters
of the United States. Volume 2: Data Sum-
maries for Areas of Probable Concern. EPA
823-R-97-007. U.S. Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Office of Science and Technol-
ogy. Washington, DC. p. 193-245.
1997c. Atmospheric Deposition in the
Great Lakes Region: Online. Available:
http://www.great-lakes.net/envt/air/
airdep.html. November 17, 1997
1998. Great Lakes Binational Toxics
Strategy Pesticide Report.
58
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Appendix A. Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals
(Chemicals in boldface are also Lake Erie LaMP Sources and Loads chemicals of concern; see Table 2)
1 tiiciicies
Herbicides
2,4,-D
2,4,5-T
Alachlor
Amitrole
Atrazine
Metribuzin
Nitrofen
Trifluralin
Fungicides
Benomyl
Hexachlorobenzene
Mancozeb
Maneb
Metiram-complex
Tributyl tin
Zineb
Ziram
insecticides
(3-HCH
Carbaryl
Chlordane
Dicofol
Dieldrin
DDT and metabolites
Endosulfan
Heptachlor and H-epoxide
Lindane
Methomyl
Methoxychlor
Mirex
Oxychlordane
Parathion
Synthetic pyretrhoids
Toxaphene
Transnonachlor
Nematocides
Aldicarb
DBCP
Industi hemicals
Cadmium
Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD)
Lead
Mercury
PBBs
PCBs
Pentachlorophenol (PCP)
Penta- to nonylphenols
Phthalates
Styrene
57
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
58
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
Appendix B. Data Screening Procedure and Selection Criteria
The first purpose of this appendix is to identify
data that can be used to characterize contami-
nant concentrations. The second purpose of this
appendix is to identify data that can be used for
the computation of loads.
Minimum Criteria for Estimating
Concentrations and Loads
The objectives of this report are to characterize
concentrations and loads. Available data with
which to achieve these objectives were collected
by many agencies for various purposes, but not
necessarily for purposes similar to those of this
report. Screening procedures based on data-
selection criteria were used to determine which
data were suitable to characterize contaminant
concentrations and loads. The basis for the data-
selection criteria was a review of published
literature on techniques to statistically analyze
water quality data for concentrations and tech-
niques to estimate constituent loads. The objec-
tive of screening criteria is to extract as much
suitable data as possible from the available data
sets in order to characterize concentrations and
loads with some degree of confidence.
Minimizing errors and maximizing confidence
in the information presented in this report is a
primary goal because management actions might
arise from conclusions drawn from the data. There
can be many sources of error in any reported data.
Variability in an estimate of a concentration or
load is dependent on the sampling errors and
nonsampling errors in the data. Nonsampling
errors can be random or nonrandom. Random
nonsampling errors tend to cancel each other out
in large data sets (Iman and Conover, 1983) and
therefore are not considered a serious problem
for the data sets discussed in this report.
Biases (nonrandom errors) in the data might not
cancel each other out, and elimination of bias
improves data quality. Biases can be minimized
by the use of selection criteria that provide the
analyst with only data applicable to the purposes
of the data analysis. Sampling error is the other
type of error that is an important consideration.
Sampling theory dictates that the magnitude of
the error in any data is inversely proportional to
the square root of the number of samples
(Richards, 1999, in press). To reduce this error
by one-half requires that four times as many
samples be collected. This knowledge translates
into certain minimum sample sizes for data sets
intended to be used to characterize contaminant
concentrations and compute loads. The ques-
tions to be answered are (1) How many samples
are enough? and (2) How much confidence in
the sample estimates is desired or needed?
Selection Criteria
One consideration is how well the samples
represent the environment from which they were
obtained, such as point sources, the lake, con-
necting channels, tributaries, sediments, fish, or
atmosphere. Even for simple descriptions of
concentration and loading data, it is important
that the samples collected represent the range of
environmental conditions. For example, the
concentrations of pollutants that are primarily
delivered during runoff and high streamflows
will be underestimated when samples are col-
lected only during low or moderate streamflows.
In much the same way, contaminant concentra-
tion in rain is dependent on rainfall volume.
Samples collected from streams, lakes, and the
atmosphere at daily, weekly, monthly, or sea-
sonal frequencies were deemed suitable and
were included in data analysis for this report.
Only where data are reported for a representa-
tive number of locations across the range of
environmental conditions were they deemed
suitable for lakewide assessment purposes.
Another consideration is the period of record of
data collection. Only water quality samples
59
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
collected from October 1,1985, to September 30,
1996, were inventoried for selected pollutants. The
distribution of data sites is also a consideration.
For aquatic sediments, single surficial sediment
samples were deemed to be most representative
of recently deposited or redeposited sediments
and associated pollutants. The period of record
for analysis of aquatic sediments was 1990 to
1997. For fish tissue, single samples were
deemed to be most representative of collection
sites. The period of record for analysis of fish
tissue was 1983 to 1993.
Minimum Criteria for Concentrations
The distribution of contaminant concentrations
in surface water can be highly variable. Esti-
mates of the mean, median, and range of con-
centrations cannot be described adequately with
very small sample sizes (Helsel and Hirsch,
1995). Summary statistics used for this report
are used to describe the center of the data
(median or mean), the variability of the data
(variance and standard deviation), the symmetry
of the data distribution (kurtosis), and the data
quantiles and extremes (minimum, maximum,
or some large or small percentiles) (Helsel and
Hirsch, 1995). For purposes of this report,
concentration data sets with a sample size of at
least 10 in which no sample results are reported
below the limits of detection are deemed suit-
able for the description of contaminant concen-
trations. A sample size of 10 provides sufficient
information for computation of median, mean,
estimates of variability, and percentiles of the
distribution. In addition, these samples should
represent a range of streamflows representative
of the sample-collection site.
A further complication is that the concentrations
of certain pollutants are often reported as being
censored or "below the detection or reporting
limit." Censored data can present an interpreta-
tion problem. For example, censored data might
be of limited use for evaluating the presence or
absence of a contaminant if the reporting limit is
higher than an environmentally relevant concen-
tration. Concentration and/or loading data can
be used for evaluating a discharge or permit
limit. Concentration data also can be used for
evaluating compliance with a standard or crite-
ria for the protection of aquatic life or human
health. Data censoring is considered severe at
the level of 50 percent or more (Helsel and
Hirsch, 1995). At censoring levels greater than
50 percent, the median concentration, for ex-
ample, might have to be estimated because it is
not a detected value.
Statistical techniques that substitute values for
censored data can be used to overcome the
detection limit problem. The Maximum Likeli-
hood Estimate (MLE; Cohen, 1959) is one
technique that substitutes values for censored
data based on what is known about the distribu-
tion of the data reported above the detection
limit and the percentage of data below the
detection limit. The MLE is a favored method
for computing the median and other percentiles
of a data set because it is less biased compared
to simpler techniques that substitute zero, one-
half, or the detection limit value for censored
data (Helsel and Hirsch, 1995). The MLE works
best with sample sizes greater than 25 (Helsel
and Hirsch, 1995). If the MLE is used with
lognormally distributed data, estimates of the
mean and standard deviation may require some
adjustment when retransformed into the original
units (Gilliom and Helsel, 1986). For purposes
of this report, the MLE is the desired method for
addressing censored data.
Data sets with censored data were judged to be
suitable for the computation of statistical summa-
ries if the detection frequency is at least 50 percent
for sample sizes of 25 to 49, and at least 25 percent
for sample sizes of 50 or more (Gleit, 1985).
Sample sizes of 50 can produce biases of 50 to 100
percent in the estimated mean and standard
deviation when there are low percentages of
detected values (Helsel and Hirsch, 1995).
80
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
The minimum criteria to characterize contami-
nant concentrations from point sources can
differ somewhat from those for tributaries.
Tributaries are predominately influenced by
wide ranges of flows and concentrations, hence
the need for more stringent screening criteria to
avoid bias. Point sources, on the other hand, are
process-based and are therefore characterized by
relatively constant flows and concentrations.
The minimum number of observations needed to
characterize concentrations of pollutants dis-
charged from point sources remains at 10. If
data are censored (reported below detection),
however, 25 to 50 percent or more of the obser-
vations should be reported above the detection
limit. With small data sets, the computation of
the MLE can produce unexpected results.
Therefore, an MLE based on 50 percent or more
observations above the detection limit would
still be preferable.
Minimum Criteria for Loads
Contaminant loads are computed using two
types of data: (1) concentration data and (2)
streamflow, effluent discharge, rainfall, or
dryfall. A load is a measure of the rate of
transport of a known mass of a contaminant
expressed in kilograms or tons per unit of time.
The most desirable situation for computing
annual loads is if samples and measurements are
taken concurrently each day. Daily loads are
computed and summed for the year. The avail-
ability of daily concentrations for computation
of annual loads is uncommon because of fund-
ing constraints on monitoring programs. Daily
streamflow values are typically collected at
gaging stations. In the absence of daily concen-
trations from which to compute daily loads,
statistical techniques are available that can make
up for limited data. Load estimators (load-
estimating equations) based on statistical regres-
sions are techniques commonly used to estimate
daily loads from water samples collected at less-
than-daily frequencies where daily streamflow
data are available (Cohn, 1988; 1994; Cohn et
al., 1992; Richards, in press).
Load estimators for tributaries and connecting
channels require that sample data be collected at
sufficient frequencies with regard to streamflow
and season (Cohn, 1994; Richards, in press).
Most load estimators in use today can accom-
modate some degree of censored values. The
Minimum Variance Unbiased Estimator
(MVUE; Cohn et al., 1992; Cohn, 1994) can be
used to compute tributary load estimates when
at least 25 percent of the sample data are above
the detection limit and when there are 50 or
more samples with at least 25 samples collected
per year. The Adjusted Maximum Likelihood
Estimator (AMLE; Cohn and others, 1992;
Cohn, 1994) requires the same sampling fre-
quency with at least 20 samples above the
detection limit. Realistically, an estimator
technique may perform quite well with any-
where from as few as 30 to as many as 75 or
more samples. Many samples are more desirable
than few samples. For smaller sample sizes, the
percentage of censored data must be kept to a
minimum of 50 percent.
For purposes of this report, data sets suitable for
the computation of contaminant loads from
tributaries were best represented by a sample
size of at least 50. In addition, concentrations of
pollutants should be detected in at least 25
percent of the samples. Samples applicable to
the computation of loads should be collected at
or near a daily streamflow gage. The samples
also must be collected over a range of low to
high streamflows representative of the stream at
the sample-collection site.
Referring to the prior discussion on point
sources, the minimum number of reported
observations needed to compute loads from
point sources remains 10. The minimum criteria
established to compute loads discharged from
point sources is at least 25 percent of the obser-
vations above the detection limit.
61
-------
Characterization of Data and Data Collection Programs for the Lake Erie LaMP
82
------- |