Distribution of an Invasive Aquatic Pathogen (Viral Hemorrhagic Septicemia Virus) in the Great Lakes and Its Relationship to Shipping

Viral hemorrhagic septicemia virus (VHSV) is a rhabdovirus found in fish from oceans of the northern hemisphere and freshwaters of Europe. It has caused extensive losses of cultured and wild fish and has become established in the North American Great Lakes. Large die-offs of wild fish in the Great Lakes due to VHSV have alarmed the public and provoked government attention on the introduction and spread of aquatic animal pathogens in freshwaters. We investigated the relations between VHSV dispersion and shipping and boating activity in the Great Lakes by sampling fish and water at sites that were commercial shipping harbors, recreational boating centers, and open shorelines. Fish and water samples were individually analyzed for VHSV using quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) and cell culture assays. Of 1,221 fish of 17 species, 55 were VHSV positive with highly varied qRT-PCR titers (1 to 5,950,000 N gene copies). The detections of VHSV in fish and water samples were closely associated and the virus was detected in 21 of 30 sites sampled. The occurrence of VHSV was not related to type of site or shipping related invasion hotspots. Our results indicate that VHSV is widely dispersed in the Great Lakes and is both an enzootic and epizootic pathogen. We demonstrate that pathogen distribution information could be developed quickly and is clearly needed for aquatic ecosystem conservation, management of affected populations, and informed regulation of the worldwide trade of aquatic organisms

The effects of the landfill technique of waste disposal on plant and soil animal communities.

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/52890/1/1323.pdfDescription of 1323.pdf : Access restricted to on-site users at the U-M Biological Station

Natural Resources Research Institute Technical Report

In the summer of 2010, the National Parks of Lake Superior Foundation and researchers from the U.S. Geological Survey’s Leetown Science Center (USGS), received support from the USEPA’s Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (GLRI) to develop and trial a full-scale BWTS involving NaOH with applicability to U.S. flag vessels in Great Lakes trade. As part of this project, the research team enlisted GSI to undertake a status test on BWTS’ biological effectiveness and residual toxicity in the context of a single shipboard trial (one ballast uptake operation, one retention period, and one ballast discharge operation). The installation to be tested was a temporary and partial (two tank) prototype installed in two tanks on board the motor vessel (MV) Indiana Harbor, with alternate dosing approaches in each of the two tanks. The subject BWTS involved elevating pH by adding sodium hydroxide (NaOH, in the same formulation used for lye or caustic soda), retaining treated ballast water for a minimum period, and then neutralizing the ballast water prior to discharge. GSI’s status test involved collecting preliminary data on the biological treatment efficacy and residual toxicity (i.e., via whole effluent toxicity, WET, testing) from a single demonstration voyage based on measurement of ballast uptake into and discharge from two treatment tanks and two control tanks. GSI developed a detailed test plan that described the design of the single biological efficacy trial (including sample collection, analysis endpoints, sample handling and custody, WET, and data collection and recording), which was subject to review and comment by the NaOH BWTS development team prior to finalization (GSI, 2011). The GSI status test began on August 18, 2011, during normal vessel ballast intake operations in the port of Gary, Indiana, and concluded three days later on August 22 during normal vessel ballast discharge operations in the port of Superior, Wisconsin. On intake, GSI sampled harbor water that was loaded into four of the ship’s port side tanks (2P, 3P, 4P and 5P). There were adequate numbers of live zooplankton in the intake water (i.e., 43,000/m3 to 235,000/m3 of live organisms ≥ 50 μm) to warrant continuation of the trial. The water in two of these tanks (3P and 4P) was concurrently dosed with enough 50 % (w/v) NaOH solution to achieve a pH of about 12. Approximately 18 hours prior to the MV Indiana Harbor’s arrival in Superior an in-tank carbonation system was activated in both treatment tanks to neutralize the pH of the treated water to below 8.8, i.e., a level considered safe for release into the receiving harbor. Following the vessel’s arrival in port, the ballast water from the treatment tanks and the untreated water from the control tanks was discharged in sequence and sampled. As a single replicate, this GSI status test of the prototype BWTS is in no way conclusive or determinative. The results reported here provide only an indication of the system’s potential effectiveness relative to no treatment. In this single trial, BWTS-treated discharge contained live organisms ≥ 50 μm (i.e., zooplankton) in concentrations ranging 178/m3 to 441/m3. These concentrations are lower than control discharge densities which ranged from 100,000/m3 to 167,000/m3. Densities of live organisms ≥ 10 and < 50 μm in the treatment discharge ranged from 2 cell/mL to 8 cells/mL, while control discharge concentrations were higher, ranging from 53 cells/mL to 92 cells/mL. In terms of organisms < 10 μm, the trial produced inconclusive results with concentrations of both total coliforms and heterotrophic bacteria highest in discharge samples from one of the treatment tanks (4P). The results from a WET test indicate that the treated and neutralized discharge water produced no residual toxicity to green algae (Selenastrum capricornutum) or the fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas). However, in these tests, the treated ballast water significantly affected both survival and reproduction of the cladoceran Ceriodaphnia dubia, indicating possible residual toxicity. The BWTS developer asserts that this toxicity could derive from artifactual pHdrift during the WET test; pH increased by a maximum of about one unit over the 24 hour period following each daily renewal (Appendix 1). The GSI team did not control pH drift in daily exposures during the WET tests to avoid altering the inherent properties (including conductivity) of the discharge water subject to toxicity testing. Overall, the BWTS warrants further development and evaluation at the land- and ship-based levels

Natural Resources Research Institute Technical Report

The Great Ships Initiative (GSI) provides independent no-cost performance verification testing services to developers of ballast treatment systems and processes at a purpose-built, land-based ballast treatment test facility located in the Duluth-Superior Harbor of Lake Superior. GSI test protocols are consistent with the requirements of the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments (International Maritime Organization, 2004). GSI procedures, methods materials and findings are publicly accessible on the GSI website (www.greatshipsinitiave.org). In August through October 2009, the GSI conducted land-based tests on the SiCURETM Ballast Water Management System in cooperation with German Bundesamt für Seeschifffahrt und Hydrographie (BSH), i.e., the German Federal Maritime and Hydrographic Agency. During the series of five consecutive valid trials, the SiCURETM Ballast Water Management System was evaluated for its ability to: (a) successfully treat ballast water without interruption, (b) meet IMO D-2 discharge standards after a five-day holding time, and (c) discharge water after the five day retention period that is environmentally benign (i.e., no residual toxicity) pursuant to United States Environmental Protection Agency water quality criteria. It should be noted that because freshwater zooplankton are in general smaller than their salt and brackish water counterparts, the larger regulated size category (greater than 50 μm in minimum dimension) did not incorporate all live zooplankton that were present in the source water assemblage. The Siemens SiCURETM Ballast Water Management System functioned properly during the five consecutive trials, and was highly effective at reducing live organism densities in the fresh water ambient conditions of Duluth-Superior Harbor, as amended in these tests to achieve IMOconsistent challenge conditions. Live organisms in the regulated size classes were discharged in densities below the IMO D-2 standard. Microbial analyses showed system performance in keeping with IMO requirements for bacteria. Chemistry data generated across trials indicated the post-retention discharge to have well less than 0.1 mg/L total residual chlorine (TRC) under ambient conditions. Ambient water collected immediately after treatment and held in a cold environment had TRC and total residual oxidant (TRO) levels which slightly exceeded this level. However, in a real world application, the intake water would also be cold, and developers claim that the test system is designed to respond to this circumstance (reflected in oxidation-reduction potential, or ORP) with a reduction in chlorine generated and injected into the intake stream. There were no acute toxic effects of treated discharge on any test species across assays and trials. Chronic toxicity effects in 100 % effluent were detected in one out of two trials for test species of zooplankton and phytoplankton. There were no chronic toxicity effects across organisms and trials in 50 % or lower effluent dilutions

Natural Resources Research Institute Technical Report

The Great Ships Initiative (GSI) provides independent, no-cost performance verification testing services to developers of ballast treatment systems and processes at a purpose-built, land-based ballast treatment test facility located in the Duluth-Superior Harbor of Lake Superior (Superior, WI). GSI test protocols are consistent with the requirements of the International Maritime Organization’s International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments (IMO, 2004) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA’s), Environmental Technology Verification Program (ETV; NSF, 2010). GSI procedures, methods, materials and findings are also publicly accessible on the GSI website (www.greatshipsinitiative.org). In August through October 2010, GSI conducted freshwater, land-based tests on three versions of the AlfaWall PureBallast® ballast water treatment system (BWTS). One version (hereafter referred to as v.1) of the PureBallast® BWTS received Type Approval by Det Norske Veritas (DNV) on behalf of the Norwegian Administration in June of 2008, following successful land-based testing at the Norwegian Institute of Water Research (NIVA). The second version (v.2), designed to conserve power relative to the first, was still undergoing IMO certification testing, and had completed successful land-based tests at NIVA immediately prior to testing at GSI during early summer 2010. The third version was a hybrid of versions 1 and 2, hereafter referred to as version 3 (v.3). The BWTS v.3 combined the 40 μm filtration of PureBallast® BWTS v.2 with the advanced oxidation system of PureBallast® BWTS v.1. The GSI Test Plan for the AlfaWall PureBallast® BWTS, hereafter referred to as the GSI Test Plan, called for evaluation the PureBallast® BWTS v.2 consistent with IMO G8 and G9 guidelines for its ability to: (a) successfully treat ballast water without interruption, (b) meet IMO D-2 discharge standards after a five day holding time, and (c) discharge water after the five day retention period that is environmentally benign (i.e., no residual toxicity). Additional research and development testing of v.1 was also planned. However, the PureBallast® BWTS (both v.1 and v.2) encountered mechanical filter failures such that no valid trials (i.e. meeting IMO and ETV threshold conditions) were completed. Instead, GSI tested the hybrid version of the AlfaWall BWTS (v.3) under a set of GSI source water conditions less challenging than those required by IMO and ETV, strictly for research and development purposes. As an addition to the research and development trials of the PureBallast® BWTS v.3 at the GSI Land-Based RDTE Facility, a set of observations on living organisms in sample water 24 hours post discharge from treatment and control retention tanks was incorporated into the revised test protocol to detect any delayed effects of the BWTS.The PureBallast® BWTS v.3 performed without interruption during the first two trials under less challenging conditions than required by IMO and ETV. During the third and final trial, the PureBallast® BWTS v.3 encountered a filter failure, and the trial was stopped and restarted under ambient Duluth-Superior Harbor conditions. No residual toxicity was detected in the discharge waters of the PureBallast® BWTS v.3. The BWTS did not effectively reduce live organism densities in the two regulated size classes despite the fact that ambient densities were well below IMO and ETV testing intake thresholds. Part of the problem likely resided with filter ineffectiveness given filamentous algal forms in Duluth-Superior Harbor water. At the same time, very low ambient UV transmittance of Duluth-Superior Harbor water (naturally caused by tannins) during these tests likely impeded effectiveness of the advanced oxidation system. These two conditions also likely account for discrepancies between performance outcomes at GSI versus NIVA. Globally, the risk of very low UV transmittance conditions is not unique to Duluth-Superior Harbor, but it is relatively rare and can be anticipated in advance. Thus, this problem could be mitigated with management practices such as open ocean BWE in combination with treatment. Conditions present in Duluth-Superior Harbor likely leading to filter malfunction, on the other hand, may be relatively common to many fresh water and brackish water harbors

Natural Resources Research Institute Technical Report

The Great Ships Initiative (GSI) provides independent, no-cost performance verification testing services to developers of ballast water treatment systems (BWTSs) and processes at a purposebuilt, land-based ballast treatment test facility located in the Duluth-Superior Harbor of Lake Superior (Superior, WI). The GSI is capable of performing testing fully consistent with the requirements of the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO’s) International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments (IMO, 2004) and the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA’s) Environmental Technology Verification Program (ETV; NSF International, 2010). GSI procedures, methods, materials and findings are also publicly accessible on the GSI website (www.greatshipsinitiative.org). In July 2010, GSI conducted a land-based performance evaluation test of a proposed BWTS developed by researchers from the U.S. Geological Survey’s Leetown Science Center in Kearneysville, West Virginia. The proposed system involved application of sodium hydroxide (NaOH, in the same formulation used for lye or caustic soda) to ballast water to raise pH, followed by application of carbon dioxide (CO2) as a neutralization step prior to discharge of the ballast water to the receiving system. The purpose of the land-based test of this system, consisting of four trials, was status testing for research and development. As such, the testing was based on, though not strictly consistent with, the IMO’s G8 Guidelines for Approval of Ballast Water Management Systems (IMO, 2008a), the IMO’s G9 Guidelines for Approval of Ballast Water Management Systems that make use of Active Substances (IMO, 2008b), and the USEPA’s ETV Program Generic Protocol for the Verification of Ballast Water Treatment Technology, v.5.1 (NSF International, 2010). During the test, the NaOH BWTS was evaluated for its ability to: (a) successfully treat ballast water without interruption, (b) successfully neutralize treated ballast water to achieve Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WIDNR) permitting levels for harbor discharge (i.e., pH 6-9), (c) meet discharge target values for water chemistry/quality and biology that are approximately consistent with the IMO Convention’s Annex D-2 discharge standards, and (d) discharge water after two- or three-day retention periods that is environmentally benign (i.e., no residual toxicity) pursuant to USEPA water quality criteria. The NaOH BWTS performed very well operationally and well enough biologically to warrant additional testing at the bench, land and ship-based scales. The system successfully treated ballast water without interruption, and successfully neutralized treated ballast water to achieve WIDNR permitting levels for harbor discharge (i.e., pH 6-9). The BWTS also significantly reduced live organism densities in treated discharge relative to control discharge in all size classes of organisms. Finally, in these tests, the BWTS performance met discharge target values that were approximately consistent with the IMO Convention’s Annex D-2 discharge standards, though precision in this estimate was not possible given the research and development testing parameters. The only possible problem that this testing revealed was that the water discharged after two- or three-day retention periods was not entirely environmentally benign (i.e., with no residual toxicity at the 100 % effluent dilution), though the level of residual toxicity in 100 % effluent evident from these tests may not be of regulatory concern

Economic benefits of remediating the Sheboygan River, Wisconsin Area of Concern

This study estimates the economic benefits of remediation in the Sheboygan River, WI Area of Concern (AOC) using two distinct empirical methods. The methodology parallels that described by Braden et al. (2008). The results are mixed. Using hedonic analysis of property sales, for owner-occupied homes within a 5-mile radius of the Sheboygan River AOC, the overall estimated loss of value is $158 million (8$49 million in losses for homes closest to the upper river segment has strong statistical support. The impacts are greatest proportionally for properties closest to the AOC. A survey-based method yields a mean estimate of $218 million (10% of property value) in willingness to pay for full cleanup of the AOC. If remediation were to induce recovery of property values, then the local communities could benefit through increased property tax revenues

Economic benefits of remediating the Buffalo River, New York area of concern

This study estimates the economic benefits of remediation in the Buffalo River, NY Area of Concern (AOC) using two distinct empirical methods. One method analyzes the effects of proximity to the AOC on prices in the residential property market. The second uses a choice survey of recent home purchasers concerning the characteristics of homes and the river. After controlling for numerous structural, community, and spatial effects, the market analysis shows that single-family residential property prices south of the river are depressed due to their proximity to the AOC by $118 million (5.4$118 million in property value losses could produce approximately $4.7 million/year in new property tax revenues. Considering only the area for which the market study shows price discounts, the survey-based estimates reveal a willingness to pay (WTP) for full cleanup of the AOC of approximately$250 million (14% of median-based market value). The reasons for discrepancies between the results of the two methods is a matter for further research