SPECIAL REPORT ON POTENTIAL OIL POLLUTION EUTROPHICATION AND POLLUTION FROM WATERCRAFT

CANADA

UNITED STATES

THIRDINTERIM REPORT ON POLLUTION OF LAKEERIE LAKE ONTARIO AND THE INTERNATIONAL SECTION OF THE ST LAWRENCE RIVER

BY THE INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION

APRIL I970

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MAP OF LAKE ERIE AND LAKE ONTARIO BASINS....Frontispiece INTRODUCTION ...... 1 OIL POLLUTION IN LAKE ERIE...... 5 EUTROPHICATION ...... 14 POLLUTION FROM WATERCRAFT ...... 22 CONCLUSIONS ...... 24 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 28

APPENDIX

The References ...... 33

INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION

SPECIAL REPORT on P OTE:NTIAL OIL POLLUTION, EUTROPHICATIOI!JA ,N D POLLUTION FROM WATERCRAFT

This is the third interimreport on the water pollution of Lake Erie, Lake Ontarioand the InternationalSection of the St LawrenceRiver. The first interimreport, dated

December 1965, informedthe two Governments cf the then known cond.itionsin Lake Erie andLake Ontario and the more significantsources of pollution.That report outlined the three phasesof the Commission'sintegrated programme for its investigation. The secondinterim report, dated August

1968, brieflyoutlined the progress made by theCommission's twoTechnical Advisory Boards and also summarized theprogress being made inimplementing remedial measures on both sides of the boundary.

The first phase of theinvestigation was completedin

1969. Theseshort-term concentrated studies were designed to securefactual information on the two lakes and the St

Lawrence River as well as theextent, origins and effects of pollution. The secondand third phases,involving detailed continuingstudies and research, were initiatedduring the first phaseand are continuing.

The InternationalJoint Commission is aware of the anxietyand wide public interestconcerning the water 2

quality of these waters. After a thoroughinquiry into the

pollutionproblems of Lake Erie, Lake Ontarioand the Inter-

nationalSection of the St Lawrence River, the Commission

concluded that three items of concern,namely oil pollution,

eutrophicationand pollution from watercraft, should now be

brought to the attention of the two Governments as a matter

of urgency.

TheCommission will reportcomprehensively and as expeditiously as practicable on the otheraspects of the inquiryundertaken by the Commission at therequest of the

twoGovernments. These otheraspects will include but will not be limited tosuch matters as transboundary movement of

pollution, water qualityobjectives and remedial measures.

The comprehensivereport may also contain further detail

regarding the subject matter of this interimreport but it will not materially alter the recommendationscontained herein.

By reference dated October 7, 1964, the Governments of

Canada and the United States requested the International

Joint Commission toinvestigate and report upon the extent,

causes, locations and effects of pollutionin the waters of

Lake Erie, Lake Ontario and the InternationalSection of the

St Lawrence River and to recommend the mostpracticable

remedial measures which might be considered necessary. The

text of the reference is appended hereto. 3

On March 21, 1969, following a serious oil pollution incidentoff the California coast, the two Governments requested the Commission to make a specialreport on the adequacyof existing safety requirements applicable to underwaterdrilling and production operations in Lake

Erie to prevent oil escapinginto the Lake: the adequacy of known methods of confiningand cleaning up any major oil spill that may occurin Lake Erie fromany source: andthe adequacy of existing contingency plans, and their implementation,for dealing with such oil spills. The text of the letter of March 21, 1969, fromthe two Govern- ments is also appendedhereto.

After an initial review, the Commission made public on October 8, 1969, a detailed Summary Report on thepollu- tionof Lake Erie, Lake Ontarioand the International Section of the St LawrenceRiver submitted to the Commission by the twoTechnical Advisory Boards it establishedfor that purpose in December, 1964. TheBoards and their Committeesconsisted ofacknowledged experts from the agencies of the two Federal

Governments, the Province of Ontarioand the States of New

York,Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan.Similarly, on

October 27, 1969, the Commission made public a specialreport entitled "Potential Oil PollutionIncidents from Oil and Gas

Well Activities in Lake Erie", prepared by its International

Lake Erie Water PollutionBoard. Both reports were given 4

wide distributionand public hearinqs were scheduledin eachcountry. Notices of thehearings were published in

accordancewith the Commission's Rules of Procedureand were also mailed to many persons known to be interested.

The publichearings on potential oil pollution in

Lake Erie were heldin Toronto, Ontario on December 2 and

inCleveland, Ohio on December 3, 1969.The hearings on

the pollution of Lake Erie, Lake Ontarioand the Inter- nationalSection of the St Lawrence River were heldin Erie,

Pennsylvaniaon January 20, Toledo,Ohio on January 21,

London,Ontario on January 23, Hamilton,Ontario on February

2, Rochester, New Yorkon February 4 and Brockville, Ontario on February 6, 1970.

At thesehearings, all thoseinterested were given opportunityto convey relevant information to the Commission andexpress their viewsorally or in writing. In fact more than 200 statements were made by elected representatives,

spokesmen forgovernmental agencies, local organizations, industryand many privateindividuals. OIL POLLUTION IN LAKE ERIE

The International Lake Erie Water Pollution Board in responseto the Commission'sdirective of April 1, 1969 and with theconcurrence of the Commission,established an ad hoc committee of its members to expeditethe exam- inationof drilling regulations and procedures, containment and cleanup of oil spills,and contingency plans. Thead hoc committee consultedresponsible provincial, state and federal agenciesin both countries. The drillingregu- lations were reviewed with state andprovincial geologists anddrilling specialists. Thead hoc committee examined in detail the drillingregulations of Ontario and Pennsyl- vaniaand the proposedrules and regulations of New York andOhio. Pursuant toMichigan's long-standing policy, leases of state owned bottomland in the Great Lakes are notgranted for offshore drilling. The committee also examinedthe means available to clean up oil spills and the status of contingencyplanning.

Lake Erie is anessential source of fresh water for some ten millionpeople that live on or near its shores.

Thus in its concern with the qualityof Lake Erie waters, the Commissionmust take accountof potential as we11 as currentsources of oil pollution. The potentialfor serious incidents of oilpollution includes but is by nomeans

5 6 limited tounderwater oil and gas explorationand develop- ment.In order to place the threat of pollution from drillingin its properperspective it is necessary to consider the significantamounts of oil pollution from municipaland industrial sources, shipping, product trans- fer, shorestorage and pipelines.

The Commissioners were appalled at the insidious intrusionof vast amounts of oil from the populousand in- dustrializedcommunities in the Lake Erie basin.For exampleduring 1969 more than1000 barrels perday of oils andgreases were dischargedinto the Detroit River, the majortributary to Lake Erie. The BuffaloRiver is another significantsource of oil pollution of boundary waters. These oils and greases occasionallyappear as slicks on the water surfacebut more oftenare emulsified in the effluents. Some of thesepollutants are adsorbedonto the suspendedload in the riverand are depositedas sediment. Such is the situ- ation in Cleveland Harbor where it was estimated that 17,600 tons of oil and grease were included in the 660,000 tonsof dry solids removed during the 1966-67dredging operations.

(These wastes arecurrently being placed in a dykeddisposal area. )

The Commission is concernedabout the numerous acci- dentalspills. In it was estimated that 2,300 7 barrels of cutting oil from one industrial spill in the

TrentonChannel of the Detroit River enteredthe western basinof Lake Erie. TheCommission fullyappreciates the implications for Lake Erie of therecent groundings of theships

"Arrow" and"Delian Appollon" off the coasts of Nova

Scotia and respectively. TheCommission was in- formed that onLake Erie at anyone time duringthe navi- gationseason 22 lakefreighters, 4 laketankers and 7 deep sea freighterscarry an estimated 120,000 barrels of oil as eitherfuel or cargo.These facts illustratethe gravity of the total oil pollution threat onLake Erie and theneed for adequate controls over the several aspects whichcomprise the total threat.

Lake Erie is partof a stable geologicbasin, the latest movenentsoccurring over 200 millionyears ago.

These structural movements were gentleand did not involve extensivefolding and faulting of thestrata. The eastern andcentral basins of Lake Erie are in what is essentially a gasprovince. The traps of hydrocarbons are stratigraphic (lateral changesin permeability within widespread rock units) , or were formedby ancient porous coral reefs. The bed rock sediments,into which the surfacecasing required in drilling operationsmust be cemented, are a minimum of 300 million yearsold, hard, and competent enough to controlany sub- surfacepressures that might be encountered. The pressures 8 encountered are less thanthose expected under normal hydrostaticconditions.

Incontrast, active oil seepshave been known to exist in the Santa Barbara Channel area for many years.

The rate offlow from these seeps has been estimated to be 50 barrels a day or onetenth of the maximum rate of flow that escapedfrom the blowout on January 28, 1969.

The :;anta Barbara area is considered to bean oil province.

It is anunstable area. Vertical upliftand subsidence is still beingrecorded on land. The traps whichproduce the hydrocarbons are tightlyfolded anticlinal structures, andcomplex fault features formed only a fewmillion years ago. Strata underlyingthe Santa Barbara Channel are un- consolidatedand apparently not strong enough to contain the pressuresdeveloped in the deeper formations. The pressuresencountered are slightly greater thanhydrostatic.

Thus the hazard of sub-surfacefluids breaking through the underlying strata is always great.

This explains why those who know the geology of both area,s haveassured the Commission that it is highlyimprobable that a dramatic drilling accident similar to the Santa Barbara incidentwould occur in Lake Erie.

The essence of pollutionprevention from drilling oper- ations is the containmentand control of drilling and reservoir 9 fluids. The primaryconsiderations which drilling regu- lationsmust take into account for each well are: the designand implementation of effective casing and cementing programmes, the adequacy of blowoutprevention and related equipment,and the disposal of drillingand reservoir fluids.

The regulationsmust be designed so as to ensurethat oper- ators during their drillingand development operations use the best materials andtechnology available.

The offshore drilling regulations of Ontarioand

Pennsylvaniaand those proposedfor New York canprovide effective protectionof the waters of Lake Erie if adequate supervisionand enforcement are also provided. A highdegree of coordinationbetween interested agencies is necessary to provideadequate but not repetitious coverage. However, if drilling is extensiveaccidents may occur.Thus it is necessaryto have contingency plans prepared to copewith suchincidents. Adequatedrilling regulations are only as strong as their enforcementand the willingness of the industry to act responsibly.Drilling and gas production activities in Lake Erie at present are limited to the Ontarioportion of the lake. According to testimonyreceived at the

Commission'shearings, the OntarioDepartment of Energy andResources Management doesprovide careful inspection andsurveillance over the drilling anddevelopment operations 10

inthe Ontario portion of Lake Erie; andthe industry has demonstrated a willingnessto cooperate with the Government and has anawareness of the environment in which it operates.

The Ontariodepartmental inspectors are on boardthe drilling platforms most ofthe time and are alwayspresent during critical periodssuch as spud-inand completion operations.

In Ontario,the Minister of Energyand Resources Manage- menthas discretionary power to suspend a drilling permit in whole or in part at any time or imposeany terms or conditions on a permitwhich he deems proper.Such action is subject to a. subsequenthearing and review by theOntario Energy

Board.The Minister can thus move veryquickly to haltany operationwhich might pose a threat to water quality. The best evidence of effectiveimplementation of existingregu- lations is thesuccessful record of trouble-free drilling forgas in Lake Erie; oilproduction has not been permitted todate. Furthermore, the Ontario regulations are being progressivelystrengthened.

At thehearings, an official of theOntario Department of Energyand Resources Management described the existing safetyrequirements and procedures in Canada applicable to drilling andproduction operations in Lake Erie andan official of the State of Michigan described its present policy of notpermitting underwater drilling. Although officials of the States of New York andOhio and the 11

Commonwealth of Pennsylvaniacooperated with the Board during theinvestigation, no officials of these states presented testimony at the hearings to assist the Commission in assess- ing the safetyrequirements and procedures applicable in the portions of Lake Erie within their jurisdictions.

Although there havebeen no oil spills in Lake Erie from drilling (except for a minor.incident in 1959 involving an estimated five barrels) , the Commission is aware of the many oil spillsreported along the shipping lanes in Lake

Erie and from land-basedsources. The frequentoccurrence ofaccidental spills requires that effective meansbe avail- ableto contain and clean up oil spillages before the legiti- mate usesof Lake Erie waters are inhibited.Moreover, the collisionor stranding of ships are potentialsources of majorpollution by oil orother hazardous materials in Lake

Erie as elsewhere.

The Boardon behalf of the Commissionreviewed the currentmethods of containment of oil on water; its removal by mechanical methads, by physical materials and by chemicals: and of protectionand clean up of shore areas. According to reports on major oil spills elsewhere in the world the adverse effects ofmaterials used to sink or disperse oil can be more harmfulthan the effects of the oil itself. As indicated in the Board'sreport the equipmentand techniques for the containmentand removal of large oil spillsunder adverse

climatic conditions are primitive.

TheCommission is of the opinion that thoseresponsible

for the confinementand clean up of spilled oil and other

hazardous materials musthave at their disposal the best

technical advice and the requiredresources of manpower,

materials andequipment. The on-scene commander needs

sufficient executive authority to fulfill his responsibilities.

Any contingencyplan should provide for the discoveryand re-

portingof pollution incidents and for the initiation of

promptaction to restrict the spread of the pollutant. Ex-

periencedpersonnel should be available to direct the clean

upand disposal of the collectedpollutants.

The Board, at the direction of the Commission,examined

the state of preparednessin both countries to respondto

majoroil pollution incidents which mightoccur on Lake Erie.

Regionalcontingency plans have been developed by theUnited

States for the Great Lakes andprovide a responsecapability

for ?;pills that mightoccur in U.S. waters. However, there

appears to be a concentrationof responsibility on the federal

establishmentand little, if any,actual recognition of state

and :Local capabilities or delegationof responsibility. Although

thelJnited States contingencyplan for the Great Lakes region appearsto be generallycomplete and detailed, its adequacy

cannot be fully assessed in the absence of a satisfactory

record of experience. 13

The contingencyplan in Canada is still in the embryo

stage.Individual agencies such as theOntario Water

ResourcesCommission, the OntarioDepartment of Energyand

Resources Management and the Federal Department of Transport

haveinternal response mechanisms established. It is under-

stood that a Canadiannational contingency plan is being developed. A major oil spill in theCanadian waters of

Lake Erie at the present time, however,would be met with

only a fraction of the responsecapabilities available becauseof the lack of a planfor coordination between the Canadianfederal, provincial and local authorities.Further- more, the Commission notesthat there is no formal plan for a concertedinternational response; only informal notification. EUTROPHICATION

TheCommission in its first interim report on the pol.lutionof Lake Erie, LakeOntario and the International

Sectionof the St Lawrence River, dated , pointedout that the excessive enrichment of these waters was due to nutrientscontained in the effluents from municipaland some industrialfacilities. At that time theCommission, on theadvice of its technicaladvisers, stated it was satisfiedthat the removal from such effluents ofphosphates, one of theessential plant nutrients involved, wouldmaterially retard further deterioration of these waters.

Consequently,the Commission recommended thatthe Governments ofCanada and the United States, as soon as possible,and in associationwith state andprovincial governments take appropriate action to ensure sufficient purification of all municipaland industrial wastes beforedischarge into these waters and their tributaries to achieve the maximum possible removalof phosphates.

The TechnicalAdvisory Boards established by the

Commission for the purposeof investigating the pollution problemin the waters under reference reported to the

Conunission in withspecific findings and recommendations. The Boards'report is a product of four yealrs of extensivestudy, research and evaluation. Several hundredscientists and engineers in both countries involved

14 15 inenvironmental assessment and pollution control par- ticipatedin the multi-million dollar study.Their report is a balancedappreciation by experiencedand specially qualified experts who collectively are engaged in the solutionand control of all aspectsof water pollu- tion. The Boards' reportsummarizes their findings, identifies the critical problems,and briefly describes the measuresnecessary in both countries for abatementof pollution in these waters.

The Commission is convincedthat the pollutionproblem requiringthe most urgent attention of the Governments of

Canada and the United States is the increasingeutrophication of the Lower Great Lakes, particularly the westernbasin of

Lake Erie. Continueddeterioration would further restrict the legitimate uses of these waters. Thus, this third interimreport deals primarily with the inputsof man- derivednutrients into the lakes. This seriousproblem will be dealtwith in greater detail in theCommission's main report,along with the otherfactors contributing to the deterioration of the quality of the waters of Lake Erie,

Lake Ontarioand the InternationalSection of the St LawrenceRiver.

Eutrophication is the biologicalresponse caused by anincrease of nutrients into lakes. The biological productivitydepends on the supply of essential nutrients.

Lake:; well suppliedwith these nutrients tend to be the

most productive. This relationship is the basis for the

"trophic"system of lake classification.

Oligotrophic lakes are poorlysupplied with nutrients

andsupport little plantgrowth. The biologicalproduction

is generally low; the waters are clear; and the deeper waters

are we11 supplied with oxygenthroughout the year.Eutrophic

lakes are rich inplant nutrients and support a heavygrowth

ofaquatic vegetation. As a result, biological production is high;; the waters are turbiddue to the dense growth of phytoplankton;and the deeper waters duringperiods of re- stricted circulation become deficient in oxygen as a result

of thedecomposition of great quantities of organic material.

Mesotrophiclakes are intermediatebetween oligotrophic and eutrophic. They have a moderatesupply of nutrients, moderate plant:abundance and moderate biologicalproduction.

If the supply of nutrientsto an extremely oligotrophic

lake is progressivelyincreased, the lake will become meso- trophicin character, and with furtherenrichment it will eventually become eutrophic,even extremely eutrophic. This whole process of progressivelybecoming more eutrophic is known as eutrophication.Thus, eutrophication refers to the wholecomplex of changes which accompany continuing enrich- mentof waters by theaddition of plant nutrients. These 17

includeprogressive increases in the growth of algae and aquaticweeds, a generalincrease in biological activity, successivechanges in the kinds of plantsand animals

living in the lake, oxygendepletion in deep water during periods of restrictedcirculation, and decreasing depth as a result of accumulatingorganic sediments.

The biologicalresponse produced by naturaleutro- phication is extremely slow. On the otherhand, the inputs of man-derivednutrients into a lake canproduce in a few decades a biologicalresponse similar to that whichunder naturalconditions would take tens of thousands of years.

Increasedpopulation, industrialization, intensified agriculturalpractices and the use of phosphorus-based detergentssince the late 1940's havegreatly increased the rate of eutrophication of lakes in many parts of the world.

Densenuisance growths of algaeand aquatic weeds degrade water quality.Cladophora, an attached alga, piles up on the beaches when dislodged bywave action. Blue-green algae accumulate on the shore creatingunsightly odorous scums.

These eutrophicconditions inhibit many of the legiti- mate uses of the lake. Algal growthsinterfere with domestic andindustrial water supplies by causing taste and dour problemsand by clogging filters; contributeto the dramatic decrease inthe number of valuablespecies of fish: restrict the use of primerecreational areas such as beaches: degrade shorelineproperties; and spoil aestheticvalues. 18

A.lthough all essential elements are required by plants for theirgrowth, phosphorus and nitrogen are recognized as the mo,st importantelements responsible for triggering eutrophicationbecause their supply is commonly lowestin relatilonto nutritional requirements. The reasonfor focusingattention on phosphorusrather than nitrogen is that it is more controllableboth in terms ofpresent tech- nologyfor removal at sewage treatmentplants and in terms ofproportion of the total supply to the lakes that is directly attributable to man.

Thephosphorus loading tothe lakes can be controlled more effectivelythan nitrogen for several reasons. The percentageof the total phosphorus supply attributable to municipaland industrial sources (70 percentfor Lake Erie, 57 percentfor LakeOntario) is higherthan in the case of nitrogen

(about 35 percentfor Lake Erie, 30 percentfor Lake Ontario).

Thus,complete removal of phosphorus from municipal and in- dustri.al wastes wouldreduce the overall supply to a greater extent.than in the case of nitrogen.Appreciable quantities of readilyassimilable nitrogen compoundssuch as nitrates and anunonia aredelivered to the lakes inprecipitation, whereasthe comparable quantities of phosphorus are minute.

Finally,during times of nitrogendeficiency blue-green algaeand bacteria can convertatmospheric nitrogen into nitrogensalts readily available for algalgrowth, thus 19 adding to the overall supply. For theseand other reasons, control of phosphorus inputs is likely to be more effective inrestricting plant growth than would be the case for nitrogen or anyother single nutrient. TheCommission is encouragedby the fact that the input of phosphorus into the lakes can be controlledbecause the concentrations of phosphorusin domestic wastes, certainindustrial effluents andrunoff from some agriculturaloperations are of our own making.

Massivegrowths of algae year after year are dependent on a persistentinflux of phosphorusand other limiting nutrientsfrom outside the lake. The resultantbiological productivity is proportionalto the rate ofinput of these nutrients.Theoretically, plant populations could be con- trolled by reducingthe input of any essential element re- quiredfor growth. The importantfeature of phosphorus is that it offersthe best combinationof a nutrient that is growth-limiting in the lakes and at the same time con- trollable by man. Phosphatesare highly reactive materials andcan readily be precipitated,absorbed or adsorbed by a variety of relativelyinexpensive methods that remove 80-95 percent of phosphorusduring sewage treatment.Comparable technologyfor the elimination of nitroqen compounds is not in such an advanced state. 20

The following table summarizesthe input of total phosphorusfrom all sources to Lake Erie and to Lake

Ontario in 1967 as reportedby the two Boards.

INPUT OF TOTAL PHOSPHORUS IN 1967 I Millions of Pounds To S ource Lake Ontario Lake Source

Lake Huron 4.5 "- Lake Erie "- 9.0

U.S. Can. U.S. Can.

Municipal 35.7 2.5 7.0 7.7 Industrial 1.8 2.2 0.3 0.6 LandDrainage 9.6 3.9 1.0 0.6 Unaccounted "" 1.1

TOTAL I 60.2 27.3

It is evidentfrom the above table thatthe principal in- put of phosphorus is from theUnited States and that, in both countries,municipalities are the major source of total phos- phorus.In 1967, the inputof total phosphorus from United

States municipalsources to Lake Erie was 35.7million pounds, of which 25 million came fromdetergents. The input of total phosphorusfrom Canadian municipal sources to Lake Erie was 2.5 mill.ionpounds, of which 1.3 million came from detergents.

Similarly, the input from United States municipalsources to

Lake Ontario was 7.7 millionpounds, of which 5.4 million came from detergents. The Canadianmunicipal input to Lake Ontario 21 was 7.0 millionpounds, of which 3.5 million came from detergents. It is apparentfrom the foregoing that detergents are by farthe greatest single source of totalphosphorus input into the Lakes. The reasonsfor reducing the phosphorus inputs from detergents are several. The firstconcerns timing. If a replacementfor detergent phosphorus could be developed rapidly, a significantreduction ofphosphorus inputs would be achievedprior to completion of phosphorus removalfacilities at sewagetreatment plants. Secondly, the effect would be toreduce phosphorus input from small communities,cottages and individual homes wherethe installation of phosphorusremoval facilities wouldimpose undue financialburdens. Thirdly, it is estimatedthat treatment costsfor phosphorus removal at sewagetreatment plants would be reducedconsiderably by removingphosphorus from detergents.

On thebasis of the foregoing the Commission is con- vincedthat the reduction of the phosphorus input into

Lake Erie, Lake Ontarioand the International Section of the St LawrenceRiver will significantlydelay further eutrophicationand will allowthe recovery to begin through naturalprocesses. POLLUTION FROM WATERCRAFT

The Commission is concernedwith the mobile sources of water pollution. Over 600 foreign vessels move cargo throughthe Great Lakessystem each year. The domestic

Great Lakesfleet is composedof nearly 600 Canadianand

Unit:ed States vessels.Only a very small percentagehave holdingtanks or treatmentfacilities for sewaqe. It is esti-matedthat over 250,000 pleasurecraft use the lower

Lakes butrelatively few have holding tanks or treatment devices.Only a fewof the ports on the lower Great Lakes have facilities to collect and treat vessel wastes. Though an increasing numberof marinas are beingequipped with pump-out facilitiesfor pleasure craft, the number is still

inadequate.

Wastes dischargedfrom commercial and pleasure water- crafrt includesewage containing human excrement,garbage,

litter, oils,bilge and ballast water. Theycan endanqer the healthof those using the receiving waters for swimming, water skiing andother water contactsports. They can also damage or kill aquaticand wildlife. Bathinq beaches and mar:Lnas canbe seriously contaminated. Garbage and litter

arenot only aesthetically displeasing but can be extremely hazardous.Critical conditions occur where vessels con-

qrecqate ln harbours,at marinas and alonq the shoreline.

The mohility of watercraftposes a potentialcontamination

threat at or near water intakes.

22 23

In a specialreport onboat and vessel pollutionthe

Boardinformed the Commission that no single law or regu- lation in Canada or theUnited States deals with all aspects of pollutionof navigable waters fromwatercraft; and that many laws are of a tokennature and not readily enforceable because of theirimpracticability or lack of personnel to performthe task or both.The Commission has been informed thatthe Ontario, Michigan and New York regulationsgovern- ingpleasure craft now in force are compatibleand satisfactory.

There is uninhibited movement ofwatercraft across state linesand the international boundary. Serious problems are created when regulationsgoverning the discharge of wastes fromwatercraft in the seve:ral jurisdictions are not com- patible. Thus it is essentialthat federal, provincial and state governmentsconcerned with the control of pollution fromcommercial vessels and recreational craft which use theinternational waters of thelower Great Lakeshave compatible regulations governing the discharge of all forms of wastes from these watercraft. CONCLUSIONS

WITH REGARD TO POTENTIAL OIL POLLUTION IN LAKE ERIE THE COMMISSION CONCLUDES:

1. The safetyrequirements and procedures applicable

to drillingand production operations in Lake Erie

ofPennsylvania, New York andparticularly those

of Ontario,if effectively supervised and properly

enforced, are adequate to prevent oil escapinginto

the Lake so as to produceserious transboundary

oil pollutionconditions. Drilling is prohibited

inthe Michigan portion of Lake Erie. The exact

status of Ohioregulations is not clear. Inthe

Ontarioportion of Lake Erie, theonly area where

there are at present drilling and gas production

operations,the enforcement of theregulations and

therequired operational procedures have been

adequate to date.

2. Currentmethods of confining, removing, dispersing

andcleaning up a major oil spill that may occurfrom anysource are primitive and inadequate. Current

methodscan deal effectively with large spills only

underthe most ideal weatherconditions. There is no

onemethod that is a panacea.Each oil pollution mis-

happresents a uniquesituation in terms of water

temperature,winds, currents, type of oil andthe

ecologyof the area. Very little is known on the 25

residualeffects on aquatic organisms of materials

used to sink or disperse oil spills.

3. TheUnited States contingencyplan for the Lake Erie

region is generallyadequate although the roles of state and local agencies as well as privateorgan-

izationsrequire clarification. On theother hand,

Canada does notyet have a detailed or coordinated

contingencyplan to marshalthe capabilities of

federal,provincial and local agencies or private

organizations.Such local plans as exist are relativelyuncoordinated. Furthermore there is an

urgentneed for a formalplan of international

cooperation.

WITH REGARD TO THE EUTROPHICATION OF LAKE ERIE, LAKE ONTARIO AND THE INTERNATIONAL SECTION OF THE ST LAWRENCE RIVER THE COMMISSION CONCLUDES:

4. The accelerated eutrophicationof these waters is dueto the presence of nutrients. The resultant

biologicalproductivity is proportionalto the rate

of input of thesenutrients. Of thenutrients in-

volved,phosphorus is theonly one that is both

growth-limitingin the lakesand can be controlled

effectively by man with presenttechnology. 26

5. The major source of phosphorus is municipalsewage.

Inthe United States 70 percent of thephosphorus

in sewageoriginates from detergents, most ofthe

remainderfrom human excreta.In Canadaapproxi-

mately 50 percentoriginates from each source.

Othersignificant sources of phosphorus are agri-

culturalrun-off and some industrial wastes.

6. The input of phosphoruscan be reducedby widespread

additionaltreatment of municipal wastes andin-

dustrial wastes containingphosphorus. An overall

programme to achieve this is essentialif eutro-

phication is to be halted.

7. Becauseof the practical difficulties in implementing

the programmecontemplated in the preceding conclusion

withinthe reasonable future, it is incumbenton both

countries to reducethe phosphorus content of deter-

qents to the maximum practicable extent at the

earliest possible time.

8. The inputs to the waters of the basinof phosphorus,

nitrogenand other nutrients from agricultural

operations are also a problem that mdst be recognized. 27

WITH REGARD TO POLLUTION FROM WATERCRAFT THE COMMISSION CONCLUDES:

9. Althoughcommercial vessels and pleasure craft are

notmajor sources of pollution when comparedwith

urbancentres, they are mobilesources that can

discharge pathogenicorganisms and petroleum

wastes at or near sensitive areas such as water

intakes,bathing beaches and marinas.

10. Garbage, litter, bilgeand ballast water discharged

intothe lower Great Lakes system are aesthetically

unattractive, restrict recreationalactivities

andinterfere with thelegitimate uses of these

waters. RECOMMENDATIONS

WITH REGARD TO POTENTIAL OIL POLLUTION IN LAKE ERIE THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT:

1. Thetwo Governments inconcert with provincial and

state agenciesand with industry accelerate andexpand,

as a matter of urgency,their applied research pro-

grammeson thecontainment and clean up of oil spills

so thoseresponsible for the execution of contingency

plans may haveavailable the best possible technical

advice, equipmentand support.

2. The Government of Canada, as a matter of urgency,

develop a detailedand fully coordinated contingency

planfor the Canadian waters of the Great Lakessystem;

the Governmentof the United States progressively

improve its contingencyplan so asto include all

availableresponse capabilities: and the two Govern-

mentsunder the general aegis of the International Joint Commissionarrange for the development of a co- ordinatedinternational contingency plan so thatboth countries may quicklyand effectively respond to major

accidentalspills of oilsor other hazardous material

in theboundary waters of the Great Lakes system.

28 29

3. In view of theurgency of the two preceding re-

commendations,

theoil production and the production of

"wet gas"containing appreciable amounts

of liquidhydrocarbons from wells in Lake

Erie be prohibited,

all wells in Lake Erie capableof oil productionbe adequately plugged,

in the western basin of Lake Erie

(west of a straight line drawn from the

tip of PeleePoint in Ontario to Marble-

headin Ohio) all drillingbe prohibited,

inthe remainder of Lake Erie drilling

notbe permitted unless the regulating

agencyhaving jurisdiction has determined

inthe light of known geologicconditions

thatthere wouldbe no reasonable likelihood

of discovering oil or "wet gas" containing

appreciableamounts of liquidhydrocarbons,

until such time asthe two Governments, through this

Commission orotherwise, have examined and approved

thecontainment methods and the contingency plans

referredto above. 30

4. The two Governmentstake steps to excludefrom the

Great Lakesships and masters likely to presentan

unreasonablerisk of oilpollution; and also make provision to alert appropriateofficials in both

countries when hazardous materials are in transit

in these waters.

WITH REGARD TO THE EUTROPHICATION OF LAKE ERIE, LAKE O'NTARIO AND THE INTERNATIONAL SECTION OF THE ST L.AWRENCE RIVER THE COMMISSIONRECOMMENDS THAT:

5. TheGovernments of theUnited States and Canada in

concertimplement at the earliest possibledate an

integrated programmeof phosphorus control to

include :

theimmediate reduction to a minimum

practicable level of thephosphorus

content of detergentsand the total

quantities of phosphorus-baseddetergents

dischargedinto the basin with the aim of

completereplacement of all phosphorusin

detergentswith environmentally less harm-

ful materials by December 31, 1972;

furtherreduction, as a matter of urgency,

of theremaining phosphorus in municinal andindustrial waste effluents discharging

to Lake Erie, Lake Ontario and their 31

tributaries and to theInternational

Section of the St Lawrence River, with a

view to achieving at least an 80 percent

reduction by 1975 andthereafter additional

reduction to the maximum extent possible

byeconomically feasible processes;

(c) thereduction of phosphorus discharged

to waters from aqricultural activities.

WITH REGARD TO POLLUTION FROM WATERCRAFT THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS THAT:

6. The federal,provincial and state governmentsin con-

cert considerand implement at the earliest possible

datecompatible regulations for the control of water

pollutionfrom all cl-asses of commercial vesselsand

pleasure craft usinq Lake Erie, Lake Ontarioand the

InternationalSection of the St LawrenceRiver. Signedthis 3rd day of April, 1970, as thethird interimreport of the InternationalJoint Commission on the pollution of Lake Erie, Lake Ontarioand the

InternationalSection of the St LawrenceRiver.

A.D.P. Heeney Charles R. Ross

Christian A. Herter Jr A. D. Scott

Eugene W. Weber BernardBeaupr6 TERMS OFREFERENCE BY THE GOVERNMENTS OF CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES TO THE INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION CONCERNING THE POLLUTION OF LAKE ERIE, LAKE ONTARIO AND THE INTERNATIONAL SECTION OF THE ST. LAWRENCE RIVER.

October 7, 1964.

I havethe honour to informyou that the Governments ofthe United States andCanada have been informed that the waters ofLake Erie, LakeOntario and the international sectionof the St. Lawrence River are beingpolluted by sewageand industrial waste dischargedinto these waters. Having in mind theprovision of Article IV ofthe Boundary Waters Treatysigned January 11, 1909, that boundary waters and waters flowing across theboundary shall not be polluted on either side to the injury of health or propertyon the other side, the two Governments haveagreed upon a jointReference of the matter to the InternationalJoint Commission, pursuant to theprovisions of Article IX ofsaid Treaty. TheCommission is requested to inquireinto and to report to the two Governmentsupon thefollowing questions:

(1) Are the waters ofLake Erie, LakeOntario, andthe international section of the St. Lawrence River beingpolluted on either sideof the boundary to anextent which is causingor is likely to causeinjury to healthor property on the other side of theboundary?

(2) Ifthe foregoing question is answered in theaffirmative, to what extent, by what causes, andin what localities is such pollution taking place?

(3) Ifthe Commissionshould find that pollution of thecharacter just referred to is taking place,what remedial measureswould, in its judgement,be most practicablefrom the economic,sanitary and other points of view and whatwould be the probable cost thereof?

In theconduct of its investigationand otherwise in theperformance of its dutiesunder this reference, the Commission may utilizethe services of engineers and other speciallyqualified personnel of the technical agencies of Canada andthe United States and will so far as possible make use of informationand technical data heretofore acquiredor which may become availableduring the course of the investigation.

33 34

The two Governments arealso agreed on the desirability of extending this Reference to other boundary watersof the Great Lakes Basin at an appropriate time. The Commission is requested to advise the Governmentswhen, in its opinion, such actionis desirable.

The Commission should submit its report and recommendations to the two Governments as soon as practicable. TERMSOF REFERENCE BY THE GOVERNMENTS QF CANADA AND THE UNITED STATES TO THE INTERNATIONAL JOINT COMMISSION CONCERNING POTENTIAL OIL POLLUTION IN LAKE ERIE FROM OIL AND GAS DRILLING.

March 21, 1969.

I refer to your letter of , 1968 reporting theresults of an exploratory meeting convened by the International Joint Commissionapproximately a yearago to obtaininformation about the programmes for drilling for oil andgas in Lake Erie which are in effect or are contem- plated bythe Province of Ontario and certain of the riparianStates. In that letter youreported that the responsible State andProvincial officials considered that there was minimalrisk of pollution of the lake's waters from drillingand production operations and that "with existingtechnology, any accidental escape of oil would be limited to a matter of minutes".

The recentserious oil spill off the coast of California may cast some doubton the propositionthat existingtechnology is adequateto confine the destructive consequences of a runaway oil well or that the risks of seriouspollution can be described as minimal.The Californianexperience suggests the necessity of a careful reviewof safety precautions and procedures applicable in Lake Erie, particularlyin vlew of theshallow and confined nature of this body ofwater.

Accordinglythe Commission is requested as a matter of urgencywithin the framework of the existing International Joint Commission pollutionreference dated October 7, 1964, on Lake Erie, LakeOntario and the InternationalSection of the St. LawrenceRiver to investigate and to make a special report at the earliest possible date on the following matters:

(1) The adequacy of existingsafety requirements and proceduresin Canada and in the United States applicable to drillingand production operations in Lake Erie to prevent oil fromescaping into the Lake so a5 toproduce serious transboundary oil pollution conditions;

35 36

(2) Theadequacy of existing mechanical, chemical andother methods of confining,removing, dispersingand cleaning up any major oil spill that may occur in Lake Erie from anysource, bearing in mind the damage that suchmethods may cause to marinelife, domestic water supplies or to other beneficial uses of the Lake in both countries; and

(3) The adequacy of existingcontingency plans and the action taken to implementthem to confineand clean up transboundary pollution and to prevent or mitigate the destructive transboundary effects of any major oil spill from any source that may occur in Lake Erie.

If the Commission finds that any of the existing safetyrequirements, methods or plans referred to in clauses numbered (l), (2) and (3), respectively are inadequate,the Commission is requested to make recommendations as to what actionshould be taken to correct anysuch inadequacy.

Moreover if after preliminary investigation the Commission is of the opinion that certain interim measures are necessary with respect to one or more ofthe matters being herein referred to it, the Commission is requested to make recommendationsconcerning any such measures in advance ofsubmitting its mainreport and recommendations.

The Governmentsof Canada and the United States are equallyconcerned about the risk of serious oil pollution in the Great Lakesfrom other sources,notably major oil spills frommarine or industrialmishaps such as those referred to inyour letter ofApril 11, 1968. The discharge of oil from land-based sources and from normal vessel operations is alreadybeing studied by the Commission.The threat of major oil pollution as a result of a disaster to a vessel in the Great Lakesinvolves broader international consideration.This aspect of the overall problem is under study by the two Governmentsthrough other appropriate channels.