Report on the King's Mill Park landfill site
Dear Mark Mattson:
This site, which is now closed and utilized as parkland, is situated on the westerly side of and adjacent to the Humber River, south of Bloor Street West. The site is bounded on the north by Old Mill Terrace and on the west by Park Lawn Cemetery. The Humber Valley Yacht Club is situated at the southerly boundary of the site.
I visited this site on Tuesday August 21, 2001 with you, Mr. Eric Mattson and with Mr. Derek Smith from the Toronto District Office, Central Region, Ontario Ministry of the Environment. We met at the site at approximately 10:00 am and proceeded to sampling station KMP-3.
At station KMP-3 a gabion crib structure of approximately 4 feet in height had been installed. The gabion is perpendicular to and the full width of the watercourse and there was evidence that water has flowed over the structure recently (although the watercourse upstream from the gabion was essentially dry at the time of our visit). A pipe of approximately 4 inches in diameter emerges from the base of the gabion (on the downstream side), below the surface of the pool of water in the watercourse at the base of the gabion. There was some flow emerging from this pipe at the time of our visit.
We then proceeded to sampling station KMP-1 which is located in a watercourse which discharges to the Humber River at the southerly boundary of the Humber Valley Yacht Club. There was some flow in this watercourse at that time. Liquid, which appeared to be water, was observed emerging from the banks of the watercourse and entering the watercourse.
Water samples were collected at KMP-1 on July 3, 2001 and at KMP-3 on July 19, 2001. These samples were submitted to PSC Analytical Services (Philip Analytical Services Inc., Burlington) for water chemistry analysis. In addition, water samples were collected at KMP-1 and KMP-3 on July 19, 2001 which were submitted to Beak International Incorporated, Brampton for 96-hour Rainbow Trout LC50 testing.
One of the substances that is of great importance in situations such as this, is ammonia. At high concentrations, ammonia becomes a significant toxicant to the aquatic biota. The lab test for Total Ammonia measures the two forms of ammonia, ionized ammonia and un-ionized ammonia, in the given sample. Ionized ammonia (NH4+) is considered non-toxic or significantly less toxic than un-ionized ammonia (NH3). The toxicity of ammonia is therefore primarily due to un-ionized ammonia (NH3). The concentration of un-ionized ammonia in water is strongly dependent on the pH and to a lesser extent on the temperature of the water, and it must be calculated according to a prescribed formula.
The water sample collected at KMP-1 on July 3, 2001 contained Total Ammonia at a concentration of 18.0 mg/L. Although the water temperature at the time that KMP-1 was sampled is not available, the air temperature at the time of sampling was reported to be approximately 20oC and on July 19, 2001 the water temperature at KMP-1 was reported to be 19oC. The pH of this sample was determined to be 7.78 at the lab. Therefore, the concentration of un-ionized ammonia for sample KMP-1 was calculated using a range of water temperatures from 17oC to 22oC. The resulting range of un-ionized ammonia concentrations for the sample from KMP-1 is from 0.3377 mg/L to 0.4834 mg/L. All concentrations of un-ionized ammonia within this range exceed the Provincial Water Quality Objective (PWQO) for un-ionized ammonia of 0.020 mg/L, by from 17 to 24 times. All concentrations of un-ionized ammonia within this range also exceed the Canadian Water Quality Guideline for the Protection of Freshwater Aquatic Life (CWQG-FW) for un-ionized ammonia of 0.019 mg/L, by from 17 times to 25 times. In addition, all of the concentrations of un-ionized within this range exceed the concentration of 0.14 mg/L (above which un-ionized ammonia is acutely lethal, i.e. the LC50 concentration). Using the probable water temperature of 19oC, the concentration of un-ionized ammonia for sample KMP-1 is 0.3905 mg/L, which exceeds the PWQO for un-ionized ammonia of 0.020 mg/L, by almost 20 times. This concentration of un-ionized ammonia also exceeds the Canadian Water Quality Guideline for the Protection of Freshwater Aquatic Life (CWQG-FW) for un-ionized ammonia of 0.019 mg/L, by more than 20 times. It also exceeds the concentration of 0.14 mg/L (above which un-ionized ammonia is acutely lethal, i.e. the LC50 concentration).
The water sample collected at KMP-3 on July 19, 2001 contained Total Ammonia at a concentration of 26.0 mg/L. The water temperature at the time of sampling at KMP-3 was 11oC and the pH of this sample was determined to be 9.59 at the lab. Based on these parameters, the concentration of un-ionized ammonia for sample KMP-3 was calculated to be 11.4042 mg/L. This concentration of un-ionized ammonia exceeds the Provincial Water Quality Objective (PWQO) for un-ionized ammonia of 0.020 mg/L, by more than 570 times. This concentration of un-ionized ammonia also exceeds the Canadian Water Quality Guideline for the
Protection of Freshwater Aquatic Life (CWQG-FW) for un-ionized ammonia of 0.019 mg/L, by more than 600 times. Furthermore, it also exceeds the concentration of 0.14 mg/L, above which un-ionized ammonia is acutely lethal (i.e. the LC50 concentration), by more than 80 times.
The 96-hour Rainbow Trout LC50 Test reports the concentration of sample material that causes the death of 50% of the test organisms that are exposed to that sample material for a 96-hour period.
The LC50 for sample KMP-1 (collected on July 19, 2001) was reported to be 46.7%. This means that a subsample containing slightly less than one-half (i.e. 46.7%) of the concentration of substance(s) in the original KMP-1 sample would be lethal to 50% of the Rainbow Trout during 96 hours of exposure to the sample. In fact, the test observations indicate that 6 Rainbow Trout died during the first 24 hours of the test at 50% (or one-half) concentration and all 10 Rainbow Trout died during the first 24 hours of the test at 100% (or undiluted sample) concentration.
The LC50 for sample KMP-3 (collected on July 19, 2001) was reported to be 33.0%. This means that a subsample containing one-third (i.e. 33.0%) of the concentration of substance(s) in the original KMP-3 sample would be lethal to 50% of the Rainbow Trout during 96 hours of exposure to the sample. In fact, the test observations indicate that 1 Rainbow Trout had died after 96 hours at 25% (or one-quarter) concentration and all 10 Rainbow Trout died during the first 24 hours of the test at both 50% (one-half) and 100% (or undiluted sample) concentrations.
Based on the analytical test results, it is most likely that ammonia toxicity was the cause of the rapid mortality of the test organisms in the LC50 tests of the water samples collected from KMP-1 and KMP-3 on July 19, 2001. Based on the LC50 test results, it is apparent that the sample from KMP-3 was more lethal than the sample from KMP-1.
PCBs are highly toxic, persistent and bioaccumulative substances. An abundance of national and international scientific studies support this. Appendix B of Water Management: Policies, Guidelines, Provincial Water Quality Objectives of the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy (July 1994) identifies PCB?s as a banned hazardous substance and Environment Canada identifies PCB as a persistent toxic substance. The Provincial Water Quality Objective (PWQO) for Total PCB?s is 0.001 ug/L.
PCBs were reported at a concentration of <0.053 ug/L in the water sample collected at KMP-1 on July 3, 2001 (with a Method Detection Limit of 0.029 ug/L); this means that the PWQO for PCB?s was exceeded by at least 29 times and at most by about 50 times. PCBs were reported at a concentration of <0.039 ug/L in the water sample collected at KMP-3 on July 19, 2001 (again with a Method Detection Limit of 0.029 ug/L); this means that the PWQO for PCB?s was exceeded by at least 29 times and at most by almost 40 times.
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds have demonstrated very high acute aquatic toxicity to freshwater fish and invertebrates. Chronic aquatic toxicity is also relatively high. Many freshwater organisms absorb and bioaccumulate PAH?s. PAH?s are highly persistent in soil and sediment. Some PAH?s are carcinogenic. Anthracene displays very high acute aquatic toxicity to freshwater organisms and has been shown to bioaccumulate in freshwater fish tissues. Phenanthrene also displays very high acute aquatic toxicity to freshwater organisms.
Four Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds were reported at concentrations in excess of their respective PWQO's in the water samples collected at KMP-1 (on July 3, 2001) and KMP-3 (on July 19, 2001). These were fluorene, phenanthrene, anthracene and fluoranthene. The PWQO's for these substances are 0.2 ug/L, 0.03 ug/L, 0.0008 ug/L and 0.0008 ug/L, respectively.
The concentrations of those PAH compounds reported in the sample from at KMP-1 were: 1.1 ug/L, 1.1 ug/L, 0.13 ug/L and 0.14 ug/L, respectively. The PWQO for each of these substances was exceeded by 5 times, 37 times, 163 times and 175 times, respectively. The concentrations of those PAH compounds reported in the sample from KMP-3 were: 1.3 ug/L, 0.65 ug/L, 0.10 ug/L and 0.14 ug/L, respectively. The PWQO for each of these substances was exceeded by 7 times, 22 times, 125 times and 175 times, respectively.
In conclusion, it is my opinion that leachate from the Kingsmill Landfill Site is acutely lethal to aquatic biota. Therefore the discharge of this leachate, which contains un-ionized ammonia and organic compounds (i.e. PCB's and PAH's), to the Humber River will cause or is likely to cause impairment of the quality of the natural environment for any use that can be made of it. Consequently, it is my opinion that the City of Toronto must be prohibited from depositing this deleterious substance (i.e. leachate) into the Humber River and ultimately, Lake Ontario, which are waters frequented by fish. Remedial measures must be undertaken at the Kingsmill Landfill Site to protect and upgrade the water quality of the Humber River and ultimately, Lake Ontario.
If you have any further questions or comments concerning this situation, please do not hesitate to contact me.
David A. Dillenbeck
