INTERNATIONAL AIR QUALITY ADVISORY BOARD
JULY 1999
| 4.1 | INTRODUCTION | |
In 1985, the Great Lakes Water Quality Board of the International Joint Commission (IJC) designated eleven critical pollutants in the Great Lakes basin. It did so in the knowledge that there were several significant pathways for these contaminants to reach the lakes, including atmospheric transport and deposition. The governments of the United States and Canada created Annex 15 (Airborne Toxic Substances) of the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement to provide for further research and control of this contaminant pathway.
Further, in 1997, the governments of the United States and Canada jointly developed the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy (BTS) (Canada and United States, 1997) with commitments to quantified reductions in the amount of contaminants released into the environment. The complete listing of Level I and Level II persistent, bioaccumulative substances designated under the strategy is shown in Table 1. Level I contaminants are largely those designated as critical pollutants by the Water Quality Board in 1985.
| Table 1. Persistent Toxic Substances (Level I and Level II)
Identified in the Great Lakes Binational Toxics Strategy Critical pollutants identified by WQB in 1985 are indicated with an asterisk (*). Persistent organic pollutants from CEC Council Resolution #95-5 are identified with a caret (^). | |
| LEVEL I | LEVEL II |
|
NOTE: Hexabromobiphenyl and Penta-chlorophenol are listed as POPs on the CEC Council Resolution #95-5 but are not included on the Strategy list.
| |
Pollutants can enter a given lake through a variety of pathways, including atmospheric deposition, direct discharge or surface-runoff into the lake or its tributaries, and resuspension of contaminated sediments. Depending on the nature of the pollutant and the location and character of its sources, the relative contribution of each pathway will be different for each pollutant for a given lake. Unfortunately, for many pollutants of concern in the Great Lakes, there is insufficient information to make mass balance estimates. However, in a few instances, sufficient measurements have been made to make estimates of the relative importance of different loading pathways. While the estimates shown in Table 2 are very uncertain, it appears that the atmospheric deposition pathway is predominant for some pollutants for some lakes. For example, atmospheric deposition appears to be the dominant loading pathway for Lake Superior (for the pollutants for which estimates could be found, i.e., Table 2).
| Table 2. Percent of Great Lakes Loadings Attributable to the Atmospheric Deposition Pathwayl | |||||
| Pollutant | Lake Superior | Lake Michigan | Lake Huron | Lake Erie | Lake Ontario |
| DDT | 97a | 98a | 97a | 22a | 31a |
| Lead | 97a; 64b; 69d | 99a | 98a | 46a | 73a |
| Mercury | 73d | > 80j | k | k | k |
| PCB's | 90a; ~ 95b,c; 82d | 58a | 78a | 13a | 7a |
| PCDD/F | ~100e; ~80f | 50-100e (PCDD);
5-35e (PCDF); 88f | 86f | ~40f | 5-35 (PCDD)e;
< 5 (PCDF)e |
| Benzo(a)pyrene | 96a | 86a | 80a | 79a | 72a |
| Hexachloro-benzene | 99f | 95f | 96f | > 17f | 40f |
| Atrazine | 97h | ~30g; 23h | ~20h | ~10-20h | ~5h |
| Mirex | k | k | k | k | ~5a |
| References and Notes
(a) Strachan and Eisenreich (1988), percentages of total inputs; (b) Hoff et al. (1996); (c) Net loss of PCB's to the atmosphere of 1600 kg/year; total non-atmospheric inputs of approximately 70 kg/year; (d) Dolan et al. (1993); (e) Pearson et al. (1998); (f) Cohen et al. (1995); (g) Rygwekski et al. (1999); (h) Schottler and Eisenreich (1997); (j) Mason and Sullivan (1997); (k) no estimates could be found; (l) there are significant uncertainties in most, if not all, of the estimates in this table. | |||||
For persistent toxic substances for which atmospheric deposition may be a significant loading source to the lakes, it is critical to determine:
These elements are necessary to develop strategic and defensible programs and policies for reducing loadings and associated toxicological effects.