Table Of ContentplB5
MisS^e
Metals in Soil and Vegetation
the Sudbury Area
in
(Survey 2000 and
Additional Historic Data)
September 2001
Ontario
Ministry of the
Environment
Metals in Soil and Vegetation
in the Sudbury Area
(Survey 2000 and
Additional Historic Data)
September 2001
Report No. SDB-045-351 1-2001
September 2001
Cette publication technique
n'est disponible qu'en anglais.
Copyright: Queen's Printer for Ontario, 2001
This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial
purposes with appropriate attribution.
®Pnnte<3oo50%recycledpaper
nauamg20%post-consumerawe
ISBN 0-7794-2102-7
PIBS4138
Metals in Soil and Vegetation in the SudburyArea
Acknowledgments
Manypeople from the Ministry ofthe Environment contributed to the collection ofthe data that went into
theproduction ofthisreport. Pnorto 1996, studies ofthe terrestrial environment in the Sudbury area were
conductedby scientists from theMinistry'sNorthern Region, SudburyDistnct Office. From 1996 onward
theresponsibilityforterrestrialmonitoringprovince-widewasassumedbyPhytotoxicologyscientistsofthe
Standards De^'elopment Branch, Ecological Standards and Toxicology Section. The scientists and
techniciansattheMinistry'sLaboratoryServicesBranchanalyzedthemanythousandsofsamplescollected
from the Sudbiuy area overtheyears.
The principal author ofthis report is Laura Morra. Randy Jones prepared the maps. Project management
was providedby George Crawford and Dave McLaughlin.
A special acknowledgment is owingto Bill Mcllveen. Bill Mcllveen prepared the first draft ofthis report,
butretiredfrompublicservicebeforetheprojectwascompleted. Billhadaspecial fondness forthe Sudbury
area andhis extensive personal andprofessional studies spanning more than two decades have contributed
significantlytoourcurrentunderstandingoftheimpactoftheminingindustryontheterrestnal environment
ofthe Sudbury basin. Good luck Bill, and thanks.
Report NumberSDB-045-3511-2001
Metals in Soil and Vegetation in theSudburyArea
Purpose ofThis Report
This report has four specific objectives:
1) to publish the results ofthe Ministry's most recent soil and vegetation sampling
programs in the Sudbur\' area;
2) toreportsomepreviouslyunreleasedMinistry'Sudburysoilandvegetationchemistry
data and to clearly identify byreference previouslypublished data;
3) to assess the soil and vegetation contaminant levels in the Sudbury area against
existing Ministry' environmental quality guidelines; and
4) to identify the need for further investigations and assessments in the Sudbury area.
Thedatasummarized inthis report spanstheperiod 1971 to2000. Somepreviouslyunreported data
MOE
from 1971-1999. is included here to ensure all data is available. Data from other historic
Sudbury environmental investigations are referenced in this report, however they are stand-alone
companion documents and are not discussed in detail in this report. To facilitate reading ofthis
document, details regarding protocols on sampling methodology', preparation, and analyses have
beenreferencedorprovidedas appendices. Technicalreviewerscanobtaintheseprotocols fromthe
reference documents.
All datainthisreportwere obtained from samplescollected fromseveralMinistrysurveysdesigned
to evaluate impacts on the terrestrial environment ofthe historic and on-going base-metal smelting
andrefining operations within the Greater Sudbury area.
Data from annual collections ofvegetation chemistryreflects changes in airqualityoverthe last 30
years,whereassoilchemistryreflectshowaircontaminantshaveaccumulatedinsoilintheSudbury
area over more than 100 years of mining, smelting, and refining activities, hi the past,
measurements ofcontaminants in vegetation were used bythe Ministryas a measure ofairquality,
but these high historical concentrations do not reflect the improved environmental conditions that
existtoday, fricontrast,theaccumulationofcontaminantsinthesoilisofsignificantcurrentinterest.
MOE
The is usingthese dataas aplanning tool to help determinewherethe important datagaps are
andthereforewhere future soil sampling efforts should be focused. Muchmore soil samplingwill
be done over the next few years, both by the Ministry and by the major mining companies, to fill
these knowledge gaps and refine our understanding ofsoil metal levels in the Sudbuiy area.
It is also important to realize that this report is not intended to provide an exhaustive interpretation
ofthe implications ofthe vegetation and soil chemistry in the Sudburyarea. Although it is obvious
that historic vegetation damage and recent recovery has occurred in the Sudbury area and that soil
metal levels are now elevated, it is important that more sampling be done to determine both the
extent and severity ofsoil metal levels in the communities before a thorough evaluafion oftheir
potential effects can be undertaken. Although not the focus ofthis report, the data contained here
as well as the data from essential additional sampling currently in progress will allow for an
ecological and human health risk assessment to be conducted specifically for the Sudbury
communities.
Report NumberSDB-045-3511-2001 n
Metals in Soil and Vegetation in the SudburyArea
Executive Summary
Emironmental impacts ofhistorical emissions ofsulphur dioxide andheawmetals from the Inco Ltd. and
m
Falconbridge Ltd. smelters Sudbur\- have been well documented. Local and provincial governments,
university researchers, and industry have done extensive monitoring, assessment, and reporting on the
environmental impacts on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.
This report summarizes the previously unreported extensive soil and vegetation chemistr>' data from the
SudburyRegularSurvey;theSudbury-SpecialSurvey,andthe Year2000SurfaceSoilSun'ey. Thesesurveys
were conducted m the Greater Sudbur\' areaby the Ministrv- ofthe Environment during the penod 1971 to
2000. Additional details regarding these surveys are provided in the report.
The study concludes that extensive sampling ofsoil and vegetation has illustrated elevated levels ofheavy
metals (specificallynickel, copper, cobalt and to a lesser extent, selenium) and arsenic are common m the
m
Sudburv'area. Theyareparticularlyelevated the vicmitv' ofthethree histonc smeltingcentres ofCopper
Cliff, Coniston, andFalconbridge, as well as, the historicroastyards. Apart from theroastyards [11], the
highest concentrations in soil consistently occur in the top-most layer ofthe soil, usually 0-20 centimetres
indepth. This indicatesairemissionsarethesource ofthe contamination. Eventhoughmanv- sampleshave
been taken several times over the last 30 years, it is not possible with this data set alone to confidently
identifycontaminanttrendsovertimeduetochangesinlaboratoryprocedures,theuncertaintythatprecisely
the same site was sampled, and the natural variabilit\' ofthese contaminants in soil.
SoillevelsarecomparedtotheMinistry'sGuidelineForUseatContaminated Sites inOntario (1996). The
MOE
soil clean-up Guidelineshavebeendevelopedtoprovide guidance forcleaningup contaminated soil.
The Guidelines are not legislated regulations. Also, the Guidelines are not action levels, in that exceeding
the level doesnotautomaticallymeanthata clean-upmustbe conducted. The Guidelines werepreparedto
help industnal propertyowners decide howto clean-up contaminated soil whenpropertv'is soldand/orthe
land-use changes. The value ofthe Guidelines to the Sudburv- area report is to provide tnggers that may
suggest the need for additional mvestigation or assessment ofsoil contamination.
This study also concludes that additional sampling is required to achieve five objectives:
m
1) detenmne the soil metal and arsenic levels residential communities adjacent to the
smelting centers;
2) determine the soil metal and arsenic levels in industrial lands adjacent to residential
communities;
3) contnbute to the development ofan ecological and human health risk assessment forthe
Sudbury area communities;
4) determine ifthenatural backgroimd levels ofthese contaminants arehigherinthe Sudbury
basin due to the presence ofbase metal ore bodies: and
5) determinethetruegeographicextentofthemetalandarsenicatmosphencdeposition,based
on the natural background levels.
Report NumberSDB-045-3511-2001 lU
Metals in Soil andVegetation in the SudburyArea
Table ofContents
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
i
PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY m
INTRODUCTION
I. 1
n. FIELD IN\ŒSTIGATIONS 1
A. Sudbury Regular Survey 1999 3
B. Sudbury Special Survey 1971-1997 4
C. Year 2000 Surface Soil Survey 4
m. ANALYTICAL RESULTS 5
A. Sudbur\' Regular Survey 1999
i) Results ofSoil Analysis 5
ii) Results ofVegetation Analysis 6
B. Sudbur>- Special Sur\^ey 1971-1997
i) Results ofSoil Analysis 7
ii) Results ofVegetation Analysis 10
C. Year 2000 Surface Soil Sur\^ey
i) Results ofSoil Analysis 12
ii) Background Nickel Concentrations in Sudbury Area Soil 14
SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION 15
LFTERATURE CITED 18
APPENDIX A - Data Tables A1-A72
APPENDIX B - Figures Bl
APPENDIX C - Maps C1-C2
APPENDIX D - Changes in LaboratoryPractices D1-D2
APPENDIX E - Denvation and Significance ofthe MOE Soil Remediation Criteria E1-E2
APPENDIX F - Derivation and Significance ofthe MOE "Ontano Typical Range" Soil Guidelines F1-F2
APPENDIX G - Derivation and Significance ofthe "UpperLimits ofNormal" Contaminant Guidelines Gl
. .
APPENDIX H - Summary ofMOE Criteria, "OTR" and "ULN" Values - Selected Contaminants H1-H2
Report Number SDB-045-3511-2001 IV
Metals in Soil andVegetation in the SudburyArea
INTRODUCTION
I.
The impacts ofhistorical emissions ofsulphur dioxide and heavy metals from the Inco Ltd. and
FalconbridgeLtd. smelters in the Sudburv'areaarewell known [3, 5, 21,23]. Extensivemonitoring
and assessment of the environmental impacts on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems has been
MOE
conducted by local and provincial governments, university researchers, and industry. Early
investigations, conducted by the former Northern Region Sudbiuy District Office, focused on the
effects ofsulphur dioxide on vegetation [6, 7, 10, 14]. The incidence ofacute vegetation injury
causedbythis gas has declined [1.9, 13, 16] andthebenefits ofreductions in sulphuremissions are
evidentintheextentofvegetationrecover,'intheSudbmyarea. Morerecently, increasingemphasis
hasbeenplacedontheaccumulationofhea\ymetalsinsoil,particularlycopperandnickel, andtheir
associated environmental effects [2, 8, 11, 12, 17, 18, 20, 22, 25].
Since 1996, the Ecological Standards and Toxicology Section (formerly the Phvtotoxicology
Section) ofthe Standards De\elopment Branch has been responsible for terrestrial environmental
monitoring in the Sudbmy area, with an emphasis on delineating the zone of soil contamination.
Improvements in air qualit\', in conjunction with land reclamation efforts, have significantly
improved the extent ofvegetation recovery in the most severely impacted areas [3, 4, 21].
Thisreportsummarizesthepreviouslyunreportedextensivesoilandvegetationchemistrydatafrom
theMinistry'sSudburyRegularSurveystheSudburySpecialSurvey, andthe Year2000SurfaceSoil
Surveythatwereconducted in the Greater Sudburyareaduringtheperiod 1971 to 2000. Although
MOE
someoftheearliervegetationdatahavebeen summarizedinpreviouslyreleased reports [18],
this is the first time that unreported historic soil and vegetation datahasbeen collatedwith themost
recentdataandevaluatedto illustratetheregionaldistributionofcontaminants insurfacesoil. These
data form the basis of an understanding of the extent and severity of surface soil heaxy metal
contamination associated with the mining industries in Sudbury, hi addition, the data and
interpretation against the Ministry Guideline, provide essential guidance for where additional
sampling and assessment is required.
Information relating to the roast yards that operated historically in the Sudbury area has been
previouslypublished in 1998 [11], and has not been incorporated into this report. In addition, this
report does not include sporadic data from soil and or vegetation sampling that was conducted in
response to complaint investigations on private residential properties. Information collected on
private residential properties is privileged to the property owner, and all complaint investigation
reports have been completed and provided to the complainants.
FIELD INVESTIGATIONS
II.
The soil and vegetation data discussed inthis report originated from three integratedbut separately
structured surveys: 1)theSudburyRegularSurvey,2)theSudburySpecialSurvey, and3) Year2000
Surface Soil Sampling.
1) The Sudbury Regular Survey consisted of a set of 21 widely-distributed sample sites
Report NumberSDB-045-3511-2001 1
Metals in Soil and Vegetation in the SudburyArea
(Appendix B - Figure 1). Monitoringactivitiesinthisprojectwereperiodicallyrevisedwith
respect to sampling frequency and species sampled. The locations ofsample sites for the
SudburyRegularSurvey reflect the program's original objective, which was (primarily) to
monitor the impacts of gaseous pollutants (i.e., SO,) emitted from the older smelter
operations on sensitive species ofvegetation in the Sudbury region. Therefore the sample
sites tendedto be spread overalarge area. Themonitoringwas initiated in 1970priorto the
commissioning ofthe Inco superstack in 1973. Data resulting from this sampling program
from 1970to 1984havebeenpreviouslypublished [18],henceonlytheresults fromthe 1999
sampling are presented in this report.
2) The Sudbury Special Survey was initiated in 1971, also before the superstack became
operational. The sampling design followed a structured protocol whereby up to 92 sample
siteswereestablishedalongthecardinalcompassdirectionsatincreasingdistances fromeach
ofthe three smelting centres ofCopper Cliff, Coniston, and Falconbridge. Although the
sample sites were focused onthe three centres ofproduction, some sites extended out to 30
km distance. None ofthe SudburySpecialdatahas beenpreviouslypublished, therefore all
data is summarized in this report.
3) The Year2000SurfaceSoilSurveyis the mostrecentwork. The soil data from the Sudbury
RegularandSudburySpecial surveys were combined to identifypreliminary data gaps and
served as the basis for the additional sampling at 103 sites, that was carried out in 2000.
During these on-going soil and vegetation surveys, the sample preparation method, the analytical
methodologies, and the laborator>' detection limits changed around 1984. These changes were a
resultofanalyticalequipmentacquisitionandimplementationofimprovedlaboratoryqualitycontrol
and assurance protocols by the MOE. More detailed information relating to changes in analytical
precision, accuracy, reliability, reproducibility, validity, sensitivity and/or potential for errors is
provided in Appendix D. Due to the change in sample preparation and improvements made to
analyticalmethodsanddetectionlimits,datafromthesamesitecannotbeconfidentlycomparedover
time. Inaddition, earlysamplesitesdidnotbenefitfromtheprecisionofgeo-referencingtechnology
available today and so subsequent samples may not have been collected from precisely the same
sites, which further erodes the confidence oftime-trend data. In consideration ofthese changes, it
is believed that data presented within this report provides a reasonably accurate picture ofcurrent
and historic soil contaminant conditions in the Sudbury area.
MOE
Following 1984, all processed samples were forwarded to the Laboratory Services Branch
wheretheywere analyzed foraluminum(Al), barium (Ba), beryllium (Be), cadmium (Cd), calcium
(Ca), chromium (Cr), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), lead (Pb), manganese (Mn), magnesium
MOE
(Mg), molybdenum (Mo), nickel (Ni), strontium (Sr), vanadium (V), and zinc (Zn) using the
Laboratory Services Branch accredited analytical method E3073L1 Antimony (Sb), arsenic (As),
.
MOE
and selenium (Se) were analyzed usingthe Laboratory Services Branch accredited analytical
method E3245L1. Nickel, copper, cobalt, selenium and arsenic were the elements ofinterest for
analysisbasedonhistoricknowledgeofthesmeltingindustryandthecontaminantsthatareproduced
during operation. Due to improvements in analytical equipment and procedures, results for more
than 20 metals can be acquired simultaneously during the ICP-AES metals scan.
Report Number SDB-045-3511-2001
