The St. Clair River Area of Concern Remedial Action Plan Progress Report Volume 1 - Synthesis Report Environmental Conditions and Implementation Actions (1998-2003) ST. CLAIR RIVER RAP PROGRESS REPORT Volume 1 – Synthesis Report Environmental Conditions and Implementation Actions (1998 - 2003) Research, writing and editing by: Greg Mayne, Environment Canada Editing by: Sandra George, Jennifer Vincent and Luca Cargnelli, Environment Canada Ted Briggs and Stewart Thornley, Ontario Ministry of the Environment Shanna Draheim, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality Original draft copy provided by: North-South Environmental Inc. Campbellville, ON St. Clair River RAP Progress Report i Volume 1 – Synthesis Report ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Personal communications and/or written submissions provided by the following: • Almost, Stuart - Ethyl Canada • Appel, Lisa - Wildlife Habitat Council (Detroit) • Baker, Sharon - MDEQ, RAP Representative (East Lansing) • Darmstaetter, Wm. - City of St. Clair WWTP • Dope, Chris - LANXESS Inc. • Fuller, Fred - St. Clair County Drain Commissioner • Hartmann, Michelle - Consultant to MNR, MOE • Hines, Chuck - St. Clair Co. WWTP • Johnson, Gary - MOE, RAP Representative (Sarnia) • Kerr, Archie - LANXESS Inc. (formerly Bayer) • Koglin, Ron - Curtis Papers, Port Huron • Ludolph, Ron - MNR, Rural Lambton Stewardship Network (Chatham) • Marsden, John - Environment Canada, RAP Representative (former) • McMichael, Reg - City of Sarnia, City Engineering Department (Sarnia) • Munro, Scott - Sarnia-Lambton Environmental Association • Newman, David - Ethyl Canada • Randell, Darrell - Rural Lambton Stewardship Network, Ducks Unlimited Canada • Thompson, John - NOVA Chemicals • Troy, Patty - BPAC, U.S. Chair, Michigan • Awad, Emily - MOE, Sport Fish Contaminant Monitoring Program • Walkling, Gordon - Shell Canada Products • Weir, Robert - St. Clair County St. Clair River RAP Progress Report ii Volume 1 – Synthesis Report FOREWORD This Progress Report serves to update the environmental conditions in the St. Clair River Area of Concern (AOC) as well as to summarize the actions taken to remediate the problems defined in the Stage 2- Recommended Plan. Specifically, it attempts to measure progress toward the recovery of identified beneficial use impairments (BUIs), identify information gaps and provide recommendations for further action. The information contained in this Report will ultimately be used to develop strategic work plans for the ‘delisting’ of the St. Clair River as one of the International Joint Commission’s (IJC) 41 AOCs. While information as recent as 2003 is discussed, the majority of the data represent the period from 1998 to 2001. The source of most industrial contaminants entering the St. Clair River has and continues to originate from Canadian industries, and therefore much of the data in this report is from Canadian sources. However, significantly more environmental monitoring data, habitat restoration and non-point source pollution control information from both Canada and the U.S. should be incorporated into future update reports in order to present a more comprehensive picture of the environmental health of the St. Clair River AOC. Information gaps can be attributed to the lengthy time interval between monitoring and reporting by scientists, agencies and industrial facilities. This document has been reviewed by Provincial, State and Federal Agencies and the Binational Public Advisory Council (BPAC), resulting in a consensus-based report. Although this Progress Report and its accompanying Technical Addendum detail the current conditions and temporal trends of contaminants in water, air, sediment and biota, progress should also be viewed in the larger sense of what has been accomplished and what remains to be done. Progress toward cleaning up the St. Clair River commenced prior to the current RAP process. The IJC first recognized that the River contained elevated concentrations of metals and nutrients due to human activities as early as the 1940s. Since then, governments, industries, municipalities, and public interest groups in both the United States and Canada have undertaken a wide range of remedial action plans (RAPs) and programs aimed at cleaning-up and rehabilitating the AOC. These actions have included the collection and analysis of environmental data, development of public awareness and environmental educational programs, and the implementation of site-specific and AOC-wide remedial measures. Such actions and programs have resulted in tremendous improvements in the environmental conditions of the St. Clair River, its tributaries and associated fish and wildlife habitats. The 1997 St. Clair River Remedial Action Plan - Stage 1 Update documented these improvements, and highlighted downward trends in industrial loadings, environmental contaminant concentrations and the frequency of chemical spills. Consequently, it was recommended that the status of four of the 10 specific BUIs be redesignated as either “not impaired” or “requiring further assessment on a St. Clair River AOC basis”. While the status of these particular BUIs has indeed improved relative to pre-implementation of remedial action plans, the process for redesignating a particular BUI will now follow the agreed upon formal binational process as outlined in the Four Agency Letter of Commitment signed in 1998. This process involves the provision of supporting documentation and data to validate the change in status, peer review of the documentation by a Technical Review Team, open discussion with local RAP committees and the public, and a decision by a Four Agency Management Team. The process will ensure that transparency, credibility and scientifically defensible decisions are achieved in the St. Clair River AOC. Consequently, tainting of fish and wildlife flavour, restrictions on drinking water consumption or taste and odour problems and, added cost to agriculture or industry, require evaluation under this process to determine their current status. Additional study is required in order to assess bird or animal deformities or reproductive problems in the St. Clair River AOC. St. Clair River RAP Progress Report iii Volume 1 – Synthesis Report TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..........................................................................................................................................II FOREWORD...............................................................................................................................................................III TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................... IV LIST OF FIGURES......................................................................................................................................................V LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................................................................... VI 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...............................................................................................................................1 2.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................5 2.1 BACKGROUND...............................................................................................................................................5 2.2 PROGRESS REPORT DATA COVERAGE ..................................................................................................13 3.0 OVERVIEW OF THE ST. CLAIR RIVER AREA OF CONCERN...............................................................14 4.0 OVERVIEW OF THE ST. CLAIR RIVER MANAGEMENT PROCESSES ................................................17 4.1 FOUR AGENCY FRAMEWORK OF ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES .................................................17 4.2 FOUR AGENCY LETTER OF COMMITMENT STRUCTURE ..................................................................18 4.3 ROLE OF BINATIONAL PUBLIC ADVISORY COUNCIL (BPAC)..........................................................18 4.4 REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN (RAP) IMPLEMENTATION STRUCTURE .................................................18 5.0 SUMMARY OF RAP IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES TO 2003............................................................19 5.1 INDUSTRIAL POINT SOURCE....................................................................................................................19 5.2 MUNICIPAL POINT SOURCE......................................................................................................................19 5.3 NON-POINT SOURCE/HABITAT ACTIONS ..............................................................................................21 5.4 IMPLEMENTATION ACTION PROGRESS SUMMARY...........................................................................24 5.5 GAP ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................................38 6.0 TRENDS AND CONDITIONS.......................................................................................................................40 6.1 WATER QUALITY ........................................................................................................................................40 6.2 SEDIMENT QUALITY ..................................................................................................................................50