Location: Ministry Home > Publications > Technical Studies and Reports > 3598e.pdf > HTML version

This is a HTML version of the original PDF document. The HTML version is being provided for reading purposes only and is not the official version of the document.

OCTOBER 1997

Ministry of Environment and Energy

ISBN 0-7778-6833-4

PLASTIMET INC. FIRE
HAMILTON, ONTARIO
JULY 9-12, 1997

OCTOBER 1997

Cette publication technique
n'est disponible qu'en anglais.

Copyright: Queen's Printer for Ontario, 1997
This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes
with appropriate attribution.

PIBS 3598E

---

Report prepared by:

Adam Socha, Scott A bernethy, Brendan Birmingham,
Robert Bloxam, Scott Fleming,
David McLaughlin & Douglas Spry
Standards Development Branch
Environmental Sciences and Standards Division

and

Frank Dobroff & Lou-Ann Cornaccio
West-Central Region
Operations Division

Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy
October 1997

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to express their appreciation to the following staff of the Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy for their contributions to this report and their guidance in its preparation: Jim Smith, Bryan Leece, Pavel Muller and Caroline Thompson, Standards Development Branch; John Mayes, Neil Buonocore, Rick Day and Denis Corr, West-Central Region; Eric Reiner, Laboratory Services Branch; and Nick Karellas, Environmental Monitoring and Reporting Branch. We also wish to acknowledge the long hours and exemplary efforts of staff of the Ministry’s Laboratory, the EMRB TAGA team, West-Central Regional Office and Hamilton District Office in obtaining and analysing a vast quantity of air, water, soil, soot and and ensuring timely responses during and after the fire. Region; Eric Reiner, Laboratory Services Branch; and Nick Karellas, Environmental Monitoring and Reporting Branch. We also wish to acknowledge the long hours and exemplary efforts of vegetation samples, providing the critical data needed to assess the impacts of the Plastimet fire. Thanks are also due to Environment Canada for providing dioxin analysis for many of the soil and vegetation samples.

Contents

• Executive Summary
• Preamble – Purpose and Scope of this Report
• Section 1 – Description of the Fire Plume and the Area of Impact
• Section 2 – Air Quality
  • 2.1 General Description
  • 2.2 Benzene and Other VOCs
    • 2.2.1 Monitoring Description
    • 2.2.2 Monitoring Findings
    • 2.2.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation
    • 2.2.4 Follow-up Advice
  • 2.3 Metals
    • 2.3.1 Monitoring Description
    • 2.3.2 Monitoring Findings
    • 2.3.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation
    • 2.3.4 Follow-up Advice
  • 2.4 Dioxins/Furans
    • 2.4.1 Monitoring Description
    • 2.4.2 Monitoring Findings
    • 2.4.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation
    • 2.4.4 Follow-up Advice
  • 2.5 Hydrogen Chloride
    • 2.5.1 Monitoring Description
    • 2.5.2 Monitoring Findings
    • 2.5.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation
    • 2.5.4 Follow-up Advice
  • 2.6 PAHs
    • 2.6.1 Monitoring Description
    • 2.6.2 Monitoring Findings
    • 2.6.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation
    • 2.6.4 Follow-up Advice
  • 2.7 PCBs
    • 2.7.1 Monitoring Description
    • 2.7.2 Monitoring Findings
    • 2.7.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation
    • 2.7.4 Follow-up Advice
  • 2.8 Data from Network Stations
• Section 3 – Soot
  • 3.1 Definition
  • 3.2 Dioxins in Soot
  • 3.3 Metals in Soot
• Section 4 – Surface Water Quality and Aquatic Toxicity Testing
  • 4.1 Fate of Water at the Fire Site
  • 4.2 Monitoring Description
  • 4.3 Monitoring Findings and Comparison with Standards
    • 4.3.1 Site Runoff from the Fire
    • 4.3.2 Storm Sewer Outfalls to Hamilton Harbour
    • 4.3.3. Surface Water
  • 4.4. Aquatic Toxicity Tests (Bioassays)
    • 4.4.1 Monitoring Description
    • 4.4.2 Monitoring Findings
    • 4.4.3 Standards/Guidelines/Benchmarks
    • 4.4.4 Interpretation
    • 4.4.5 Follow-up Advice
  • 4.5 Summary of Water Quality and Aquatic Toxicity Analyses
• Section 5 – Soil Quality and Phytotoxicity Studies
  • 5.1 Emergency Response Sampling – Soil Dioxin
  • 5.2 Emergency Response Sampling – Soil PAHs
  • 5.3 Emergency Response Sampling – Soil Metals
  • 5.4 Emergency Response Sampling – Vegetation Dioxin
    • 5.4.1 Street Tree Dioxin
    • 5.4.2 Street Tree PAH
    • 5.4.3 Street Tree Metals
    • 5.4.4 Vegetable Garden Dioxin
    • 5.4.5 Vegetable Garden PAH
    • 5.4.6 Lawn Grass Dioxin
  • 5.5 Community Response Sampling of Soil, Lawn Grass, and Vegetables
  • 5.6 Vegetation Injury
  • 5.7 Conclusions
• Section 6 – Dioxin Emission and Exposure Estimates
  • 6.1 Estimates of Total Dioxin Releases from the Plastimet Fire
  • 6.2 Dioxin Intake During the Fire
  • 6.3 Comparison of the Estimated Plastimet Fire Dioxin Exposures with Exposures associated with Known Adverse Effects in Humans
  • 6.4 Supplementary Data on Dioxins in Fires and Background Levels
• Section 7 – Outcome
• Appendix 1 – Derivation and Significance of the MOEE "Ontario Typical Range" Soil Guidelines
• Appendix 2 - Derivation and Significance of the MOEE Soil Remediation Criteria (Clean-up Guidelines)

Executive Summary

This report provides a compilation and interpretation of the environmental monitoring data regarding the July 1997 fire at the Plastimet Inc. plastics recycling facility in Hamilton, Ontario. The focus of this report is on the contaminant levels found in several environmental media at various times and locations during and after the fire, and on the potential risks of long-term adverse effects on the environment and on public health as a result of contaminants released by the fire. This report does not address aspects pertaining to the initial emergency response nor to occupational health.

The fire began about 7:45 pm on Wednesday July 9^th, 1997 and ended in the morning of Saturday July 12^th. At least 400 tonnes of polyvinyl chloride plastic (PVC) were consumed in the blaze, along with other materials on-site. A number of hazardous substances were emitted during the fire, directly to air and indirectly to water (runoff from the site) and land (soot and other atmospheric deposition to soil, surfaces and vegetation).

No long-term human or environmental health effects are expected to occur as a result of the Plastimet fire. This is consistent with public statements issued by the Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Health Department. Within days after the fire was extinguished, the substances tested for had returned to concentrations within or close to the normal urban background range for all media — air, water, soil (off-site) and vegetation -- except where prior contamination of soil and storm sewer water existed.

Hydrogen chloride (HCl), which forms hydrochloric acid in the lungs and if dissolved in water, is likely the cause of most of the acute health effects reported during the course of the fire including skin. throat and eye irritation. HCl would also have caused the metal corrosion reported in the area close to the fire. HCl was produced only while the fire was burning, and any that was produced was neutralised quickly by dilution with water and by reacting with naturally occurring alkaline material in soil.

Other substances released by the fire, including dioxins, benzene, PAHs and metals, may cause health and/or environmental effects upon long-term, repeated exposure. Provincial standards such as Ambient Air Quality Criteria (AAQCs), Point-of-Impingement standards (POIs) and Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQOs) are designed to protect human and environmental health from the long-term adverse effects of these substances. However, since exposure during the fire was of short duration, such effects are not expected to occur and the short-term exceedance of an AAQC, POI or PWQO for these substances is not cause for concern.

Dioxins were of particular relevance as their production has been associated with PVC fires. Worst-case estimates suggest that the Canadian Tolerable Daily Intake (TDI) of dioxins and furans of 10 pg TEQ/kg body weight/day may have been exceeded for some people during the fire, but only if vegetables contaminated at the highest level found were consumed every day. A more realistic exposure estimate suggests that the TDI may have been exceeded for some people for a single day only, primarily due to exposure to smoke. Given the marked drop off of dioxin levels in soot and on vegetation both with distance from the fire and over the week following the fire, it is unlikely that the TDI was exceeded for most people. Total maximum dioxin/furan exposure was 1/30^th to 1/40^th of the lowest reported exposure level associated with adverse effects in humans.

A synopsis of the sample analyses and interpretation follows:

Air

• During the course of the fire, concentrations of several volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in air in the vicinity were above normal including benzene, vinyl chloride, 1,3-butadiene, chlorobenzene, styrene, toluene and naphthalene. The only available provincial air standard or guideline for VOCs exceeded during the fire was the half-hour point-of-impingement (POI) guideline for naphthalene. After the fire was extinguished, VOC concentrations dropped back to normal urban levels, except for xylene near the site which was nevertheless detected at a level well below the provincial standard.
• The concentration of hydrogen chloride in the smoke during the fire was elevated, frequently in excess of the Ministry’s half-hour POI guideline in the adjacent area. Elevated instantaneous readings were measured as far away as the mountain brow. Levels returned to normal soon after the fire was out.
• The concentrations of the metals nickel, lead and chromium in the smoke in the vicinity of the fire were above normal during the fire, with some samples exceeding provincial ambient air quality criteria (AAQCs) and POIs. Samples taken at locations further downwind showed normal concentrations of metals, although these latter samples contained only brief downwind exposures.
• Dioxin levels in air were higher than normal during the fire, exceeding the MOEE 24-hour AAQC on the first day of the fire, but rapidly declined to normal Hamilton background levels after the fire was extinguished.
• Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) levels in the fire plume itself were quite high compared to the levels normally found in Hamilton air, however PAH levels further downwind at regular monitoring stations were normal and below the Ministry’s 24-hour AAQC (for benzo[a]pyrene). PAH in air near the fire site declined to normal levels after the fire was extinguished.
• Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were detected in air immediately adjacent to the fire (but within the plume), however these were at levels below the Ministry’s 24-hour AAQC.
• Because of the short duration of exposure, no long-term adverse health effects are anticipated due to contaminants in air from the fire. Many acute symptoms reported by those exposed, e.g. skin irritation, eye irritation and sore throat, as well as incidents of metal corrosion, are attributable to hydrogen chloride released during the fire.
• Air contaminant levels during the fire were below the occupational health limits which are often used in emergency response situations to determine the risk of immediate adverse health effects.

Soot

• Soot deposited on surfaces was analysed for dioxins and metals. Dioxin levels in soot were far below established clean-up guidelines and posed no health threat to residents. Several metals were detected in soot samples taken from areas both near to and distant from the fire, including nickel, chromium, zinc, copper, manganese, vanadium, iron and lead. The latter, which was of greatest concern in terms of toxicity, was in fact not detected in soot sampled at the location that had the greatest amount of soot deposited by the fire. Conversely, the highest lead level was found in soot at an industrial site over two kilometres away.

Water

• Analyses were done on water from site runoff, storm sewers, sewer outfalls to Hamilton Harbour and in the harbour’s Wellington St. slip. Levels of some metals, volatile organic chemicals and PAHs were high at times in the site runoff (fire-fighting water). The levels were lower in the storm sewer outfalls and still lower in Hamilton Harbour surface water,and they declined with time.
• Where detected in surface waters, most of these substances were present at low concentrations. The Provincial Water Quality Objective (PWQO) for the PAH phenanthrene was exceeded in Hamilton Harbour. Dioxins were also found, but at very low levels. Surface water in the Wellington St. slip also exceeded PWQOs for several metals after the fire, namely aluminum, cadmium, copper, lead, silver and zinc. By July 15th, concentrations of most of the 65 chemicals were within reported ranges for Hamilton Harbour and most were below their respective PWQOs. PWQOs provide protection to aquatic life over long term exposure; short term exposures resulting from the fire should not pose any long term threat to aquatic life in the harbour. Hamilton's drinking water, which is drawn from some distance out in Lake Ontario, was not affected.
• Aquatic bioassays demonstrated that the storm sewer water was lethal to aquatic life (rainbow trout and D. magna). However, there was no evidence of fish being killed in Hamilton Harbour. Furthermore, storm sewer water sampled upstream from the fire site was lethal to both test species, indicating that the toxicity was due to substances in the sewer unrelated to the fire. Lasting impacts from runoff from the fire are unlikely since most measured chemical concentrations are now back within reported normal ranges, and most are lower than PWQOs.

Soil and Vegetation

• The fire did not have a measurable impact on soil dioxin levels. All soil dioxin levels were within a range typical of an urban environment and substantially below the Ministry’s health-based soil clean-up guideline.
• Soil PAH contamination at one particular site is too high to be related to the fire, and is most likely due to historical contamination at that site. Marginally elevated soil PAH levels at two other sites near the fire site may be fire related. Marginally elevated levels of one PAH, phenanthrene, in street tree foliage at three sites are likely fire related.
• The fire had no measurable impact on metal concentrations in soil and on vegetation.
• The fire resulted in dioxin levels on street tree foliage that were between 2 and 3 times higher than normal for an Ontario urban community to a distance of about three residential blocks from the fire site. The dioxin was present mostly as a surface deposit and was readily washed off by rain. After one week the highest foliar dioxin levels had been reduced to within the range typical of an urban environment. Dioxin levels on street tree foliage fell by more than 80% in the two weeks subsequent to the fire, confirming that most of the dioxin that landed on all types of vegetation was in the form of surface-deposited dust and soot, which readily washed off or rapidly photodegraded.
• Sampling of residential gardens revealed no detectable dioxin (detection limit 1 pg/g) in vegetable produce in the areas of highest soil and tree foliage dioxin concentrations and in areas where soot fallout was documented. There was no relationship between dioxin levels in lawn grass and distance from the fire site or areas of substantial soot fallout.
• The community response sampling of 20 residential properties conducted in August confirmed that one month after the fire there was no measurable residual dioxin contamination of soil and vegetation, including home garden produce. A health assessment by MOEE toxicologists concluded residential garden vegetables were safe to eat and that there is no health risk to children playing in backyards and parks. Normal use of property has not been affected.

Technical Report

Plastimet Inc. Fire, Hamilton, Ontario, July 9-12, 1997

Preamble–Purpose and Scope of this Report

This report provides a compilation and interpretation of the environmental monitoring data regarding the July 1997 fire at the Plastimet Inc. plastics recycling facility in Hamilton, Ontario. The focus of this report is on the contaminant levels found in several environmental media at various times and locations during and after the fire, and on the potential risks of long-term adverse effects on the environment and on public health as a result of contaminants released by the fire. This report does not address aspects pertaining to the initial emergency response nor to occupational health.

Section 1–Description of the Fire Plume and the Area of Impact

The fire at Plastimet Inc. in Hamilton began about 7:45 pm on Wednesday July 9^th and ended in the morning of Saturday July 12^th. Over this time period, the burning characteristics of the fire varied greatly. The burning characteristics can affect both the emission rates from the fire and the area impacted by the plume.

Initially the intensely burning fire resulted in a dense black cloud of smoke rising hundreds of metres into the air. Light winds then transported the plume over the city. During this stage of the fire most of the smoke impinged upon a large area of downtown Hamilton and, when winds were from the north, smoke reached areas on the escarpment.

Due to the presence of a slow moving high pressure system over southern Ontario throughout the period of the fire, wind speeds were very light and the direction of the winds varied over time and across the Hamilton area. During the nights when the clear skies resulted in the formation of strong temperature inversions over the area, wind speeds were even lighter and the wind directions more variable than during the day. The strong night time inversions also resulted in reduced rise of the plume from the fire which increases the impacts closer to the fire site.

The intensely burning stage of the fire lasted for over a day. Both a wind monitor near the harbour and a 90 m high meteorological tower in east Hamilton showed winds from the north or northeast on the evening of July 9^th. However by midnight, the harbour monitor showed light winds from the west or southwest while the downtown tower still indicated light winds generally from the north. The plume could have impacted various parts of downtown and Hamilton Mountain over this night.

On the early morning of July 10th the plume was still moving toward Hamilton Mountain, but then the winds changed to come from northeast to easterly directions. These wind directions persisted until late afternoon and resulted in impacts in western parts of the greater Hamilton area. In the late afternoon, the winds shifted to come from a generally westerly direction (northwest through southwest). These winds persisted through the evening and overnight with the wind speeds decreasing to low values by midnight.

During that night, the temperature inversion coupled with decreased heating of the fire plume resulted in greatly reduced rise of the plume. The fumes were impacting immediately downwind of the fire by this time. For the remainder of the fire, the plume at the site was mixed over a much smaller height than during the intensely burning phase of the fire. Air monitoring results from this time to the end of the fire showed concentrations of various contaminants to be much larger near the fire site.

Wind directions remained westerly until the morning of July 11^th when the data at the meteorological tower showed a swing to easterly winds off of the lake. The easterly wind directions occurred for about 8 hours replaced by a generally westerly flow in the late afternoon of July 11^th. From the afternoon to the end of the fire, winds were from the southwest to northwest directions, affecting the local area east of the site.

The rates at which contaminants from the fire would have been deposited on surfaces (i.e., homes, patio furniture etc.) depends on the amount of material released from the fire, the size of the particles to which the contaminants were attached and on the dispersion of the plume. All of these factors would have varied through the fire period as the burning characteristics of the fire changed. As indicated by the descriptions above of the areas impacted by the fumes, deposition could have occurred over a number of areas in Hamilton during the intensely burning portion of the fire. Any deposition that occurred from the morning of July 11^th until the end of the fire would have been much larger in the local fire area since the fumes were at ground level.

Section 2–Air Quality

2.1 General Description

The fire started at approximately 7:45 July 9,1997. Emergency personnel requested air monitoring by a Level 2 response team late that night, who commenced air sampling at midnight. The mobile TAGA "Pioneer" arrived in Hamilton at about 5:30 am on July 10^th and commenced hydrogen chloride (HCl) measurements at 6:40 am. On July 11^th, two dedicated analysers for measuring nitrogen oxides (NO_xand carbon monoxide (CO) were installed in the Pioneer however the sampling results were not cause for concern. The mobile TAGA "Explorer" arrived in Hamilton at about 12:00 noon on July 10^th and commenced sampling and immediate analysis for eight volatile organic compounds (VOCs) including vinyl chloride and benzene. Regional personnel employed the "Photovac" portable gas chromatograph to measure several VOC parameters, focussing on benzene.

During the fire samplers were set out at fixed sites and sampled for PCB, dioxins/furans and particulates which were to be analysed for metals.

Initially, colorimetric tubes were exposed downwind close to the fire. Cyanides, vinyl acetate and acid gases were non-detectable, although HCl was later to be measured. Carbon monoxide was measured at 3-4 ppm, and nitrogen oxides measured 2-3 ppm.

Air monitoring sampling times are provided in Table 2.1, sampling location information is provided in Table 2.2. Air monitoring data are summarized in Table 2.3.

TABLE 2.1: CHRONOLOGY OF AIR SAMPLING
	WCR AIR QUALITY UNIT				EMRB MOBILE TAGA PIONEER				EMRB MOBILE TAGA EXPLORER
					HCL PLUME TRACKING/HCL SAMPLING HALF HOUR AVG.				VOC SAMPLING-HALF HOUR AVG
	SAMPLING TIME			Sampling	SAMPLING TIME
	START	FINISH	POLLUTANT	Device	START	FINISH	ACTIVITY	UNIT	START	ACTIVITY	UNIT
July 09/97
12:00AM	12:00AM	11:59PM JULY 9	METALS/PAH	Hivol
	12:00AM	11:59PM JULY 9	METALS/PAH	Hivol
	12:00AM	11:59PM JULY 9	METALS/PAH	Hivol
	2:00AM	11:59PM JULY 9	METALS/PAH	Hivol
	12:00AM	11:59PM JULY 9	METALS/PAH	Hivol
	12:00AM	11:59PM JULY 9	PM-10	Hivol
01:00AM
02:00AM
03:00AM
04:00AM		Several of the WCR routine air monitoring hivol samplers were operating prior to fire.
05:00PM
06:00AM
07:00AM
08:00AM
09:00AM
10:00AM
11:00AM
12:00PM
01:00PM
02:00PM
03:00PM
04:00PM
05:00PM
06:00PM
07:00PM	07:45PM START OF FIRE
08:00PM
09:00PM
10:00PM
11:00PM
	START OF AIR MONITORING
July 10/97
12:00AM	12:1AM	11:59PM	DIOXIN	PUF/FILT.
	12:05AM	instantaneous	NOX	Gastec
		instantaneous	Add Gases	Gastec
		instantaneous	Hydro.Cyanide	Gastec
	12:45AM	instantaneous	Vinyl Acetate	Gastec
01:00AM
02:00AM
03:00AM
04:00AM	04:53AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac
05:00AM
06:00AM					06:41AM	.07.11AM	HCL PLUME TRACK	TAGA HCL
07:00AM					07:17AM	.07:47AM	HCL PLUME TRACK	TAGA HCL
					07:48AM	08:18 AM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL
08:00AM					08:21AM	08:51 AM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL
09:00AM	09:35AM	9:35AM JULY 11	Hivol / PAH	Hivol
	09:38AM	9:38AM JULY 11	PM-10	Hivol
10:00AM					10:41AM	11:11AM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL
11:00AM	11:30AM	11:30AM JULY 11	Hivol / PAH	Hivol
	11:35AM	11:35AM JULY 11	PM-10	Hivol
						11:59AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL	12:22PM	VOC 30 MIN	TAGA VOC
12:00PM						12:33AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL	12:30PM	VOC 30 MIN	TAGA VOC
									12:34PM	VOC 30 MIN	TAGA VOC
									12:34PM	VOC 30 MIN	TAGA VOC
									12:48PM	VOC 30 MIN- DW	TAGA VOC
01:00PM
						01:03PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
						01:36PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
02:00PM									02:10PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									02:10PM	VOC 30 MIN-UW	TAGA VOC
					02:26PM	02:56PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL
									02:29PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									02:40PM	VOC 30 MIN-UW	TAGA VOC
					02:59PM	03:29AM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL	02.40PM	VOC 30 MIN-UW	TAGA VOC
03:00PM						03:31PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
					03:31PM	04:01PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL
04:00PM
05:00PM
06:00PM
07:00PM
08:00PM									08:42PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
09:00PM									09:12PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
10:00PM									10:12PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									10:42PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
11:00PM									11:12PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									11:12PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									11:12PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
July 11/97
12:00AM
01:00AM									01:30AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
02:00AM									02:00AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
03:00AM									03:00AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									03:30AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
04:00AM									04:00AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
05:00AM									05:00AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
06:00AM	06:38AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac					06:00AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
07:00AM	07:18AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac					07:00AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
	07:27AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac
	07:37AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac
	07:47AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac
	07:57AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac
08:00AM	08:57AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac
09:00AM	09:08AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac					09:07AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
	09:28AM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac					09:07AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									09:07AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
10:00AM									10:07AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
11:00AM									10:07AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
					11:07AM	11:37AM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL	10:07AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
						11:40AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG	TAGA HCL
12:00PM						12.14PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL	12:15PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
						12:48PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
01:00PM					01:24PM	01:54PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL
						01:56PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
02:00PM	02:11PM	instantaneous	Benzene	Photovac	02:28PM	02:58PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL	02:16PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
						02:57PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL	02:46PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
03:00PM						03:28PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL	03:16AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
					03:59PM	04:29PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL	03:46PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									04:16PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
04:00PM	04:25PM	08:10PM	Metals	Hivol					04:46PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
						04:21PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
05:00PM	05:00PM	07:50AM July 12	PCB	Nutec	05:04PM	05:11PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL	05:16PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
	05:30PM	07:45AM July 12	DIOXIN	PUF/FILT.		05:12PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL	05:46PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
						05:54PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
06:00PM						06:29PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL	06:16PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
					* INDICATES NOX and CO CONTINUOUS MONITORING				06:46PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
07:00PM					07:10PM	07:40PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	* TAGA HCL
	07:50AM	02:45PM	DIOXIN	PUF/FILT.	07:30PM		instantaneous	* TAGA HCL
	07:50AM	03:00PM	PCB	Nutec	07:43PM	08:13PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	* TAGA HCL
					07:55PM		instantaneous	* TAGA HCL
08:00PM	08:10PM	11:40PM	Metals	Hivol		08:15PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL	08:00PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
					08:59PM	09:29PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	* TAGA HCL
09:00PM					09:19PM		instantaneous	* TAGA HCL	09:00PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
						09:27PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL
						09:58PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL
10:00PM						10:33PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL	10:00PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
11:00PM						11:22PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL	11:00PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
	11:45PM	03:25AM	Metals	Hivol
						11:55PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL
July 12/97
12:00AM						12:57AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL
01:00AM						01:28AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL	01:30AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
02:00AM						02:13AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL
						02:43AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL
03:00AM						03:14AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL
	03:25AM	07:35AM	Metals	Hivol
						03:44AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL
04:00AM						04:16AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	* TAGA HCL	04:47AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
						04:48AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
05:00AM						05:18AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
						05:49AM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
06:00AM									06:48AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
07:00AM	07:40AM	02:40PM	Metals	Hivol					07:30AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
	07:50AM	03:00PM	PCB	Nutec
	07:50AM	02:40PM	Dioxin	Mod. Hivol
08:00AM
09:00AM									09:00AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									09:30AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
10:00AM									10:10AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									10:51AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
11:00AM									11:21AM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
12:00PM
01:00PM					01:40PM	03:49PM	HCL PLUME TRACK.	TAGA HCL
02:00PM						02:26PM	HCL 30 MIN. AVG.	TAGA HCL
03:00PM
04:00PM
05:00PM
06:00PM
07:00PM
08:00PM
09:00PM
10:00PM
11:00PM
12:00PM
July 13
01:00AM
02:00AM
03:00AM
04:00AM
05:00AM
06:00AM
	POST FIRE
July 17	01:30PM	01:30AM July 18	VOC	CART
	01:30PM	01:30AM July 18	DIOXIN	Mod. Hivol
12:01PM	12:30PM	01:30PM	VOC-2	CART
	12:30PM	01:30PM	VOC-2	CART
July 28									12.53PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
01.00PM									01:23PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
01:00PM									02:00PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
02:00PM									02:00PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									02:30PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									02:30PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
03:00PM									03:13PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									03:43PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
07:00PM									07:00PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									07:30PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
									02:30PM	VOC 30 MIN-DW	TAGA VOC
July 27	07:30AM	DIOXIN	Mod. Hivol
July 30	09:59AM	10:29AM	VOC	CART
			BTX	Photovac

Table 2.2: Time and Location of Air Samples (other than TAGA)
Sample Information	Timing Information
Cross Reference Sample ID #	Field Sample ID	Sample Description	Sample Location	Parameters Analyzed For	Sampling Date On	Sampling Time
29000	C44667-001	PUF/Filter	Elgin/Kelly	Dioxin/Furan	10/7/97	12pm-12pm
		Cartridge	Ball Packaging	PCB	11/7/97	5pm-7:50am
		Cartridge	Ball Packaging	PCB	12/7/97	7:50am-3pm
		PUF/Filter	17 Sawyer St	Dioxin/Furan	11/7/97	5:30pm-7:45am
		PUF/Filter	17 Sawyer St	Dioxin/Furan	12/7/97	7:50am-2:40pm
		Hivol	17 Sawyer St	metals	11/7/97	4:25pm-8:10pm
		Hivol	17 Sawyer St	metals	11/7/97	8:10pm-11:40pm
		Hivol	17 Sawyer St	metals	11/7/97	11:45pm-3:25am
		Hivol	17 Sawyer St	metals	12/7/97	3:25pm-7:35am
		Hivol	17 Sawyer St	metals	12/7/97	7:40am-2:40pm
29000		Hivol	Elgin/Kelly	PAH	10/7/97	11:30am-11:30am
29300		PM10	Elgin/Kelly	PAH	10/7/97	11:35am-11:35am
29114		Hivol	Vickers/East18	PAH	10/7/97	9:35am-9:35am
29324		PM10	Buchanan Park	PAH	10/7/97	9:38am-9:38am
29025		Hivol	Barton/Sanford	Metals/PAH	09/7/97	12pm-12pm
29114		Hivol	Vickers/East18	Metals/PAH	09/7/97	12pm-12pm
29118		Hivol	Main West	Metals/PAH	09/7/97	12pm-12pm
29112		Hivol	Dundurn Castle	Metals/PAH	09/7/97	12pm-12pm
29324		PM10	Buchanan Park	Metals/PAH	09/7/97	12pm-12pm
POST FIRE
	216770	PUF/Filter	17 Sawyer St	Dioxin/Furan	17/07/97	1:30pm-1:30am
	216773	Cartridge	17 Sawyer St	VOC	23/07/97	12:30pm-1:30pm
	216771	Cartridge	Tracks, west side	VOC	23/07/97	12:30pm-1:30pm
	216774	PUF/Filter	25 Sawyer St	Dioxin/Furan	27/07/97	7:30am-7:30pm
	216733	Cartridge	Site debirs	VOC	30/07/97	9:59am-10:29am
	216734	Cartridge	field blank	VOC	30/07/97
		Photovac	Site debris	VOC	30/07/97	9:59am
		Photovac	Ferguson City Yard	VOC	12/08/97	10:53am-11:24am
		Photovac	Simcoe/tracks	VOC	22/08/97	10:09am-11:01am
	216775	PUF/Filter	25 Sawyer St	Dioxion/Furan	13/08/97	8:45am-8:45pm
	216665	PUF/Filter	25 Sawyer St	Dioxion/Furan	23/08/97	7:45am-7:45pm
	218155	PUF/Filter	Ryco	Dioxion/Furan	05/09/97	8:30am-3:30pm /td>
	218035	Hlvol	Ryco	Metals	05/09/97	8:30am-1:45pm
	218154	PUF/Filter	25 Sawyer St	Dioxin/Furan	12/09/97	7:00am-12:00am
	218012	Hlvol	25 Sawyer St	Metals	15/09/97	3:30pm-6:30am
	218030	Catridge	CNR/Victoria	VOC	01/10/97	9:50am-10:20am
	218032	Catridge	Simcoe/Victoria	VOC	01/10/97	10:35am-11:05am
	218011	Hlvol	Simcoe/Victoria	Metals	30/09/97	9:45am-12:00am
	218010	Hlvol	Simcoe/Victoria	Metals	02/10/97	12pm-12pm
	218012	Hlvol	Simcoe/Victoria	Metals	05/10/97	12pm-12pm
	218012	Hlvol	Simcoe/Victoria	Metals	08/10/97	12pm-12pm
	218012	Hlvol	Simcoe/Victoria	Metals	09/10/97	6:30 am-6:30am12pm
	218025	Catridge	CNR/Victoria	VOC	08/10/97	2:05pm-2:55pm
	218026	Catridge	Simcoe/Victoria	VOC	08/10/97	2:00pm-2:45pm
	218152	PUF/Filter	Simcoe/Victoria	Dioxin/Furan	08/10/97	12pm-12pm
	218151	PUF/Filter	Simcoe/Victoria	Dioxin/Furan	09/10/97	6:30am-6:30am

Table 2.3 – Plastimet Fire–Air Contaminants Monitoring Data Summary

Contaminants		Concentration Range	No. of Samples
VOCs Half-hours by TAGA	Benzene	0-82 µg/m3	55
	Vinyl Chloride	0-2.9
	1,3-Butadine	0-22
	Chlorobenzene	0-18
	Styrene	0-55
	Tolune	2-67
	Naphthalene	0-46
Instantaneous By Photovac	Benzene	0-827 µ g/m3	12
Hydrogen Chloride Half-hours by TAGA	HCI	28-700 µg/m3	32
Hydrogen Chloride Instantaneous by TAGA	HCI	53-930 µg/m3	Approximately 20 hours of plume tracking (i.e., monitoring while driving
Metals	Vanadium	0-10 µg/m3	5
	Chromium	0-5.7
	Manganese	0.043-0.782
	Iron	1.6-29.7
	Nickel	0.005-6.4
	Copper	0.044-1.2
	Lead	0.03-10.1
	Zinc	0.24-4.1
Dioxins/Furans		2.8-19.3 pg/m3	3
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (in plume)	Benzo[a]pyrene	up to 354 ng/m3	2
Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (at monitoring stations	Benzo[a]pyrene	0.5-1.0 ng/m3	4
PCBs (in plume)		2-95 ng m3	2

2.2 Benzene and Other VOCs

2.2.1 Monitoring Description

VOC parameters such as benzene were measured by the TAGA "Explorer". These were primarily half hour measurements although some may have been less. The TAGA targeted the following compounds: benzene, vinyl chloride, 1,3-butadiene, chlorobenzene, hexane, styrene, toluene and naphthalene. The portable Photovac instrument targeted benzene exclusively. This monitor samples for approximately 15 seconds and then analyses the grab sample.

2.2.2 Monitoring Findings

July 10– Winds at the beginning of the event were northeast. The TAGA was set up downwind at Barton/Elgin and moved to several locations in the vicinity. Elevated levels of benzene up to 54 µg/m³, naphthalene up to 27 µg/m³, vinyl chloride up to2.1 µg/m³, styrene up to 37 µg/m³ and 1,3-butadiene up to 22 µg/m³ were detected. At the request of the fire department, air samples were taken inside the Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Detention Centre. These samples showed elevated concentrations of benzene up to 56 µg/m³, vinyl chloride up to 1.7 µg/m³, 1,3-butadieneup to 22 µg/m³, styrene up to 48 µg/m³, toluene up to 44 µg/m³ and naphthalene up to 36 µg/m³

July 11–Winds were west, east, southeast and southwest on this day. The TAGA monitored mostly in the Victoria/Barton/Ferrie area, but also took measurements as far east as Wentworth and Brant. Elevated levels of the same parameters were measured. Benzene peaked at up to 82 µg/m³, naphthalene up to 46 µg/m³, vinyl chloride up to 2.9 µg/m³, styrene over 50 µg/m³ and 1,3-butadiene up to 28 µg/m³. The highest readings occurred at Victoria Ave. at 6-7 am.

July 12–The TAGA monitored in the vicinity of the fire (Wellington, Victoria, Burton, etc.). Two elevated samples were found similar to previous days, with benzene up to 49 µg/m³. A sample inside the cardiac ward of General Hospital showed low levels mostly typical of indoor air. Monitoring concluded at noon.

The portable Photovac monitor was used to take 12 samples on July 10-11 and gave results for benzene only. Samples were taken mostly close to the fire. Three consecutive samples on the morning of July 11 yielded concentrations of 827, 324 and 554 µg/m³.

VOC data from sampling done after the fire, i.e. from July 17 through August 22, are provided in Table 2.4.

Table 2.4: Post-Fire VOC Sampling Data
micrograms/cubic metre			Samples are by absorbent cartridge method except where noted by Photovac 1997
			17 Sawyer Jul 17-18	Tracks, 80 m SW Jul 23	17 Sawyer Jul 23	Site Debris Jul 30	Site Debris Jul 30	Feruguson City Yard Aug 12		Simcoe/Wellington/tracks Aug 22
	24 hr	½ hr	downwind	downwind	upwind		Photovac	Photovac	Photovac	Photovac	Photovac
	Guideline	Standard	12 hours	1 hour	1 hour	½ hour		50m dw	20m dw	25m dw	15m dw
VINYL CHLORIDE	1	3
1,3-BUTADIENE						0.4
ISOPRENE			0.6	0.1	0.2	1.0
1,1-DICHLOROETHENE	35	70
DICHLOROMETHANE	1765	5300	0.4	5.5	0.6	8.9
1,1-DICHLOROETHANE
HEXANE	12000	35000	10.5	15.8	3.8	7.0
TRICHLOROMETHANE	500	1500	0.1		0.1
1,2-DICHLOROETHANE	400	1200	0.1
CYCLOHEXANE	100000	300000	1.8	0.4	0.3	0.5
CARBON TETRACHLORIDE	600	1800	0.9	0.2	0.5	0.4
BENZENE			4.4	1.9	1.9	9.1	8.9	nd	nd	nd	nd
TRICHLOROETHYLENE	28000	85000	0.1
1,1,1-TRICHLOROETHANE	115000	35000	0.6	0.2	0.4	0.5
1,2-DICHLOROPROPANE	2400	2400
TOLUENE	2000	2000	15.7	3.1	8.3	29.1	38.8	38.3	49.2	29.2	36.8
1,1,2-TRICHLOROETHANE
1,2-DIBROMOETHANE
TETRACHLOROETHYLENE	4000	10000	0.3	0.1	0.2	0.3
CHLOROBENZENE			0.2	0.1		0.4	nd	nd	nd	nd	nd
ETHYLBENZENE	4000	4000	14.2	0.9	3.9	26.2	18.9	nd	nd	nd	nd
M,P-XYLENE	2300	2300	34.2	1.7	12.7	5.3	nd	nd	nd	nd	nd
STYRENE	400	400	3.8	0.7	0.2	73.8	46.0*	nd	12.2*	nd	nd
O-XYLENE	2300	2300	8.6	0.6	3.2	2.2
1,1,2,2-TETRACHLOROETHANE
a-PINENE			0.2	0.1	0.4	0.4
1,3,5-TRIMETHYLBENZENE			2.4	0.3	0.5	0.6	nd	nd	nd	nd	nd
1,2,4-TRIMETHYLBENZENE	1000	500	6.4	0.7	1.6	2.0	nd	nd	nd	nd	nd
1,3-DICHLOROBENZENE							nd	nd	nd	nd	nd
1,4-DICHLOROBENZENE			0.2				nd	nd	nd	nd	nd
1,2-DICHLOROBENZENE							nd	nd	nd	nd	nd
NAPHTHALENE	22.5	36	1.4	0.8	1.0	4.0
BROMODICHLOROMETHANE
CIS-1,3-DICHLOROPROPENE
ACRYLONITRILE	100	300

dw-downwind

nd-non-detect

*- o-xylene and styrene co-elute by Photovac method- unable to distinguish from each other.

2.2.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation

The VOC measured were well above normal for each parameter but no guidelines were exceeded, with one exception – the half-hour point-of-impingement guideline (POI) for naphthalene was exceeded in consecutive samples on the morning of July 11 on Victoria Ave. Some of the targeted VOC do not have environmental health guidelines. The levels of benzene were elevated. Routine 24-hour samples normally measure from 2-25 µg/m³.The three high benzene readings measured by the Photovac were far above normal levels.

The levels of 1,3-butadiene and vinyl chloride were much higher than normally seen. Both are rarely detected, if at all, by routine samples. The highest vinyl chloride measurements were just below the provincial standard.

After the fire was out, VOC was measured on July 17-18 over a 12-hour period downwind at the Sawyer St. location. Concentrations were low or at normal levels, although some odour was still present. Benzene was measured at 4.4 µg/m³,toluene at 15.7 µg/m³, xylenes 42.8 µg/m³. Vinyl chloride and 1,3-butadiene were not detected. Upwind/downwind sampling was performed over one hour on July 23, and again showed low levels with no obvious downwind effect despite the continued presence of odours.

On July 30, a cartridge sample was exposed directly on the site over fire debris and measured mainly normal VOC levels. Only toluene (29 µg/m³) and styrene (74 µg/m³) levels were higher than normal. The Photovac instrument was also employed here and found levels similar to the cartridge for the ten parameters it was set up to measure. The Photovac was used again on August 12 and 22 at short distances downwind from the fire site (15-50 metres), and measured primarily toluene (up to 49 µg/m³).

On July 28, the TAGA van returned to the site and also measured low levels of seven VOCs including benzene. Only xylene levels were above normal, but far below the provincial standard.

2.2.4 Follow-up Advice

Health risks posed by these compounds are normally related to long term exposure/long term risk. It is unlikely that these brief exposures would cause long term effects. The levels of contaminants in local air during the fire were below the occupational health limits often used in emergency response situations to determine the risk of immediate adverse health effects.

2.3 Metals

2.3.1 Monitoring Description

Particulate samples were measured by a high volume sampler set up at 17 Sawyer St. (at ground level) close to the fire. Five samples were collected on July 11-12, mostly of 3- or 4-hour running time on regular glass fibre filters. The samples were analysed for a scan of 8 metals – vanadium, chromium, manganese, nickel, copper, lead and zinc.

2.3.2 Monitoring Findings

The monitoring data for metals in air are summarized on Table 2.5.

It is unclear how much each sample was downwind of the fire as winds were mostly west to southwest and a nearby large industrial building would have affected wind currents. Nonetheless, metals concentrations were elevated for nickel, lead and chromium. Concentrations of these metals were the highest, and of the greatest health concern. Iron, manganese, copper, vanadium and zinc concentrations were not particularly elevated. The air flow rates through the sampler were not measurable and thus had to be estimated. As a result, the metals concentrations are not precise.

2.3.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation

The 24 hr AAQC for nickel of 2 µg/m³ was exceeded twice and the POI once. The maximum was 6.4 µg/m³.

The 24 hr AAQC for lead of 2 µg/m³was exceeded once as was the POI. The maximum was 10.1 µg/m³.

The 24 hr AAQC for chromium of 1.5 µg/m³was exceeded twice and the POI once. The maximum was 5.7 g/m³

The 24 hr AAQC for iron of 10 µg/m³was exceeded three times and the POI twice. Maximum was 29.7 µg/m³ These standards relate to metallic iron. It is unlikely that emissions from the fire contained iron in this form. The iron levels measured are common to routine measurements in the city.

The high volume (hivol) sampling network was operating for the full day on July 9. Five stations’ filters with some potential to be downwind of the fire, at Barton/Sanford, the mountain and west end were analysed for metals. The concentrations all fell in the normal range of observations. It should be noted that these stations may have been impinged on by the fire for only an hour or two at most, out of their 24-hour running time.

Table 2.5: Metals in Air
micrograms per cubic metre (ug/m3)
		Vanadium	Chromium	Manganese	Iron*	Nickel	Copper	Lead	Zinc	Cadmium
		V	Cr	Mn	Fe	Ni	Cu	Pb	Zn	Cd
	Measured at 17 Sawyer St.#
July 11	4:25pm-8:10pm	0.000	0.000	0.043	1.635	0.005	0.200	0.956	1.130
	8:10pm-11:40pm	0.000	0.050	0.0910	4.113	0.090	0.403	2.808	1.630
	11:45pm-3:25am	0.000	1.670	0.303	12.184	2.438	1.195	10.075	4.060
July 12	3:25am-7:35am	0.097	5.663	0.782	29.706	6.398	0.127	1.616	1.400
	7:40am-2:40pm	0.005	0.170	0.068	2.063	0.198	0.044	0.033	0.240
	Measured at 29025-Barton/Sanford (TSP)
July 9	12 pm -12 pm	0.016	0.126	0.353	5.551	0.020	0.176	0.083
	Measured at 29114- Vickers/East 18th (TSP)
July 9	12 pm -12 pm	0.006	0.010	0.104	1.992	0.010	0.031	0.026
	Measured at 29118- Main West (TSP)
July 9	12 pm -12 pm	0.007	0.016	0.083	1.761	0.012	0.347	0.010
	Measured at 29122- Dundurn Castle (TSP)
July 9	12 pm -12 pm	0.002	0.003	0.061	1.435	0.003	0.032	0.002
	Measured at 29324- Buchanan Park School (PM10)
July 9	12 pm -12 pm	0.003	0.008	0.050	0.972	0.002	0.009	0.019
	Measured at Ryco Gate
Sept 5	8:30am-1:45pm	0.016	0.049	0.340	2.900	0.019	0.053	0.000
	Measured at 17 Sawyer St.
Sept 15	3:30pm-6:30am	0.002	0.003	0.034	0.800	0.009	0.065	0.010		0.0005
	Measured at Victoria/Simcoe
Sept 30	9:45am-12:00am
	Measured at Victoria/Simcoe
Oct 2	12 pm -12 pm	0.004	0.023	0.210	1.100	0.006	0.150	0.0000
	Measured at Victoria/Simcoe
Oct 5	12 pm -12 pm	0.005	0.023	0.036	0.800	0.000	0.078	0.000
	Measured at Victoria/Simcoe
Oct 8	12 pm -12 pm	0.041	0.110	0.550	7.600	0.039	0.110	0.030
	Measured at Victoria/Simcoe
Oct 9	6:30am-6:30am	0.018	0.047	0.230	3.600	0.015	0.130	0.030
	1/2 hr POI	5	5	7.5	10*	5	100	10	100	5
	24hr AQC	2	1.5	2.5	4*	2	50	5	120	2

*- Standards are for metallic iron.

# Results are approximate because air flow had to be estimated at 45 CFM.

2.3.4 Follow-up Advice

There is probably some metals contamination from the particulate fallout in the immediate vicinity of the fire. The extent of this is not well known as only one sampling site was employed near the fire.

The air quality results from the Plastimet Inc. fire indicate there should be no adverse long-term health effects resulting from exposure to metals. Please see Section 3 (Soot) and Section 5 (Soil and Phytotoxicity) for related information concerning the deposition of metals.

2.4 Dioxins/Furans

2.4.1 Monitoring Description

Sampling for these contaminants was conducted with polyurethane foam (PUF) and filter assemblies. Air is drawn through this assembly by a vacuum motor. Samples are normally run for 24 hours, and one such sample did run in this standard fashion at the downtown Elgin/Kelly AQI station on July 10. Two other samples were taken on July 11 and 12 near the fire at 17 Sawyer St. (about 250 m northeast of the fire) at ground level.

McMaster University Chemistry Professor Brian McCarry took a sample of air particulate from the column of smoke, about 10 m above ground level on the roof of an industrial building across the street from the fire (about 100m northwest) using a modified Hi-Vol air sampler. The sampler ran from the afternoon of July 11 to the early morning of July 12.

2.4.2 Monitoring Findings

The monitoring data for dioxins and furans in air are summarized in Table 2.6.

The Air Quality Index monitoring (AQI) station at Elgin/Kelly Sts. measured 19.3 pg/m³ (total toxic equivalents -TEQ^*). The Sawyer/Victoria Sts. samples ran on July 11-12 for 15 hours and on the 12^th for 7 hours in the early morning. The first sample was run briefly on the roof of an industrial building on Wellington St. adjacent to the fire, where heavy contamination of this sample appears to have spoiled it. That is, too much heavy particulate matter in the sample overloaded the laboratory analytical equipment beyond quality control parameters. The July 12^th sample measured 2.8 pg/m³TEQ.

Dr. McCarry’s smoke plume sample contained about 1012 pg TEQ /m³.

---

^* TEQ (toxic equivalents),away of expressing the toxicity of a mixture of dioxins and furans.

						Table 2.6: Dioxins/Furans in Air
						Plastimet Fire
						Units are pg TEQ/m ¹ — Objective is 5.0 pg TEQ/m3 (24 hour)
								Post fire ---->
Dioxin/Furan		JULY 10 12:00am-12:00am)29000-Elgin/Kelly		JULY 11 Sampling by Dr. B. McCarry Plume filter sample		JULY 12 (7:50am-2:40pm)Sawyer/Victoria		JULY 27 (7:30am-7:30pm) Sawyer/Victoria		AUG 13 (8:45am-8:45pm) Sawyer/Victoria		AUG 23 (7:45am-7:45pm) Sawyer/Victoria		SEPT 5 (8:30am-3:30pm) Wellington/Ferrie
Congener	TEF*	CONC	TEQ*	CONC	TEQ*	CONC	TEQ*	CONC	TEQ*	CONC	TEQ*	CONC	TEQ*	CONC	TEQ*
OCDF	0.001	43.00	0.04	820.0	0.8	4.70	0.00	0.150	0.00	0.033	0.00	0.034	0.00	0.250	0.00
OCDD	0.001	13.00	0.01	620.0	0.6	3.90	0.00	0.200	0.00	0.190	0.00	0.160	0.00	0.370	0.00
2378TCDF	0.1	15.00	1.50	800.0	80.0	6.30	0.63	0.170	0.02	0.068	0.01	0.051	0.01	0.350	0.04
2378TCDD	1	0.62	0.62	45.0	45.0	0.23	0.23	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.010	0.01
12378PCDF	0.05	9.80	0.49	610.0	30.5	1.50	0.08	0.034	0.00	0.011	0.00	0.014	0.00	0.130	0.01
23478PCDF	0.5	15.00	7.50	780.0	390.0	1.60	0.80	0.028	0.01	0.012	0.01	0.016	0.01	0.120	0.06
12378PCDD	0.5	2.60	1.30	170.0	85.0	0.40	0.20	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.035	0.02
123478H6DF	0.1	34.00	3.40	1600.0	160.0	3.60	0.36	0.075	0.01	0.022	0.00	0.034	0.00	0.170	0.02
123678H6DF	0.1	14.00	1.40	670.0	67.0	1.40	0.14	0.031	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.017	0.00	0.075	0.01
234678H6DF	0.1	11.00	1.10	490.0	49.0	1.00	0.10	0.026	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.014	0.00	0.046	0.00
123789H6DF	0.1	1.30	0.13	61.0	6.1	0.11	0.01	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00
123478H6DD	0.1	1.80	0.18	110.0	11.0	0.21	0.02	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.017	0.00
123678H6DD	0.1	3.90	0.39	270.0	27.0	0.55	0.06	0.012	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.021	0.00
123789H6DD	0.1	5.60	0.56	320.0	32.0	0.65	0.07	0.011	0.00	0.000	0.00	0.009	0.00	0.024	0.00
1234678H7DF	0.01	44.00	0.44	1700.0	17.0	5.30	0.05	0.130	0.00	0.039	0.00	0.047	0.00	0.210	0.00
1234789H7DF	0.01	8.20	0.08	330.0	3.3	0.86	0.01	0.032	0.00	0.008	0.00	0.010	0.00	0.048	0.00
1234678H7DD	0.01	14.00	0.14	740.0	7.4	2.70	0.03	0.070	0.00	0.040	0.00	0.049	0.00	0.110	0.00
TOTAL TEQ*			19.29		1011.7		2.78		0.05		0.02		0.02		0.17

^* TEF-TOXIC EQUIVALENCY FACTOR

TEQ - TOXIC EQUIVALENTS

Five days after the fire was out, a sample was taken on July 17-18 over a 12-hour period downwind at the Sawyer St. location. A level of 0.6 pg TEQ/m³ was measured. Air samples taken even later (on July 27, August 13 and August 23) at the Sawyer St. location measured only 0.051,0.017 and 0.025 pg TEQ/m³, respectively. Concentrations of less than 0.1 pg TEQ/m³ are normally found at the AQI station.

2.4.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation

An initial air sample started approximately four hours after the fire broke out and running for 24 hours showed dioxin levels higher than normal. The sample was taken at the Ministry of Environment and Energy’s (MOEE) downtown air quality station one kilometre southwest of the fire site.The first sample result indicated 19 picograms (pg) TEQ/m³ in the smoke plume. While this is above the MOEE daily air quality guideline of 5 pg TEQ/m³,the amount of dioxin that may have been inhaled would nevertheless have been only 50% of the daily tolerable exposure limit for dioxins in air, water, soil, food and consumer products recommended by the federal government.

Dioxin analyses of particulate material collected by Dr. B. McCarry of McMaster University during most of Friday July 11^th, 1997 indicates that dioxin levels on the roof of an industrial building adjacent to the fire averaged about 1000 pg TEQ/ m³. During this latter phase of the fire, winds were predominantly out of the west and the main part of the plume was east of the fire site. Using the measurement on the roof of an industrial building on Wellington St. near the fire (about 10 m above ground) as a reference point, air dispersion modelling by R. Bloxam (MOEE) indicates that 24 hour average ground level concentrations ranging from about 650 pg TEQ/ m³ at the building down to less than 50 pg TEQ/ m³ may have occurred out to about 2 km east and east-northeast of the fire site (see Figure 2.1). On July 11^th, homes were evacuated east of the fire over to Victoria Avenue. East of the fire site at Victoria Ave., it is estimated that ground level concentrations were about 150 to 250 pg TEQ/m³. Over the 1 to 2 km further east of Victoria Ave. (where people were not evacuated), ground level concentrations at the plume centreline would have dropped from this level down to less than 50 pg TEQ/ m³.So for this part of Hamilton (east of Victoria Ave., where the plume covered a sector east and east-northeast of the fire site), and for this period of the fire, the 50th percentile ground level concentration may have been about 125 pg TEQ/m³( 90^thpercentile – 225 pg TEQ/m³).

The 1012 pg TEQ/m³ found in Dr. McCarry’s sample taken in the smoke plume on the roof of an industrial building just 100m northeast of the fire is similar to air concentrations measured near the open burning of large amounts of garbage. Considering the size of the fire and the presence of large amounts of PVC plastic involved, this concentration of dioxin in air close to the fire is consistent with the other dioxin levels found. While exceeding the MOEE air quality criterion, this sample was taken in a location that the public could not have been exposed to and at a time when the public had been evacuated from this area. A sample taken the following day at ground level at Sawyer St. showed the dioxin level had dropped to well below the MOEE air quality criterion, as did a sample taken five days after the fire had been extinguished.

Average concentrations for the 2nd Phase, in picograms per cubic metre.

Figure 2.1 – Contour plot of smoke plume for Friday July 11, 1997 (day 3)

To recap MOEE air monitoring data, from Wednesday night and most of Thursday, the plume of smoke from the fire rose vertically for a few hundred metres and then dispersed. A 24 hour average air dioxin concentration of 19 pg TEQ/m³ was measured about 1 km SW of the fire site on Thursday. Early on Friday, reduced fire heating combined with a nighttime temperature inversion resulted in the plume remaining near the ground. In the latter phase of the fire through Saturday, winds were out of the west most of the time. MOEE sampling during this phase of the fire was taken at Sawyer St. A sample taken on Saturday yielded 2.8 pg TEQ/ m³ with a second heavily contaminated sample taken on Friday and Saturday which was unmeasurable. This second sample was run for a portion of the time on the roof of an industrial building near the fire. After the fire, an air level of 0.6 pg TEQ/m³ was measured.

Levels of dioxins in air in Hamilton declined dramatically after the fire was extinguished. The dioxin levels in the last series of air samples were normal background levels. MOEE ambient air monitoring data for Hamilton during 1991 to 1995 was about 0.08 pg TEQ/m³ on average, and ranged from 0.01 up to a maximum of 0.2 pg TEQ/m³

No adverse health effects are expected due to the fact that these guidelines are based on continuous life-time exposure. Estimates of total dioxin releases from the fire and estimates of human exposure via inhalation of smoke during the fire are provided in Section 6.

2.4.4 Follow-up Advice

The air quality results from the Plastimet Inc. fire in Hamilton indicate there should be no adverse long-term health effects resulting from exposure to dioxin.

2.5 Hydrogen Chloride

2.5.1 Monitoring Description

HCl was measured by the TAGA "Pioneer" both by stationary half-hour measurements and by continuous plume tracking while the vehicle was in motion.

2.5.2 Monitoring Findings

Half-hour stationary measurements – HCl was measured at up to about 700 µg/m³, half-hour average. This maximum occurred at Birge/Wellington on July 11. An instantaneous peak of 930 µg/m³ occurred in this worst hour. Other elevated half-hour levels in the 250-500 µg/m³ range occurred in the Ferrie, Victoria and Barton St. area from July 10 to the morning of July 12. High instantaneous readings in the 500-830 range occurred during these measurements. One excursion to Beach/Kenilworth Sts. showed a lower level there of 45 µg/m³(maximum instantaneous 175 µg/m³) on July 11. After the fire was out at 2:00 pm on the 12^th, the readings fell to less than 20 µg/m³.

Plume tracking – The TAGA Pioneer made several excursions, taking measurements while mobile. Measurements are approximately of 30-second duration in this mode and are considered "instantaneous" as mentioned above. On July 10, the van circled the Barton/Wellington/Ferrie Sts. area and measured HCl readings of up to 720 µg/m³. The van travelled up to the mountain on the morning of the 10^th and made instantaneous measurements at the brow on Mountain Park Ave. Readings up to 300 µg/m³ were observed. On July 11, measurements were made while mobile in the vicinity of the fire along Victoria, Ferrie, Wellington, Wentworth Sts., etc.Readings up to 690 µg/m³ were observed closer to the fire. On July 12 in the afternoon after the fire was mostly out, instantaneous values were less than 20 µg/m³.

The TAGA returned to the fire site on July 29 and measured low levels of HCl, a half-hour maximum less than 2 µg/m³ and a maximum instantaneous peak of only 3.4 µg/m³. The van "fingerprinted" the odorous emissions and found the presence of aniline, some aromatics, and ketones at very low concentrations. Mercury was also measured at up to 4 ng/m³, which is a normal background level.

2.5.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation

The HCl objective is 100 µg/m³ (half-hour POI). This level was frequently exceeded in the neighbourhood of the fire on the 10^th, 11^th and 12^th. Continuous plume tracking showed elevated levels up to 300 µg/m³ (instantaneous reading) on the mountain brow on the 10^th. Measurements in the far east end of the city at Kenilworth were up to 175 µg/m³ instantaneous and 45 µg/m³ for a half hour on the 11^th. However, HCl levels during the fire remained far below the occupational health limit (ceiling exposure value) of 7400 µg/m³ which is often used in emergency response situations to determine the likelihood of immediate adverse health effects.

2.5.4 Follow-up Advice

HCl would likely have been the cause of most of the acute health effects reported during the course of the fire including skin, throat and eye irritation. HCl would also have caused the metal corrosion reported in the area close to the fire. HCl was produced only while the fire was burning, and any that was produced was neutralised quickly by dilution with water and by reacting with naturally occurring alkaline material in soil.

2.6 PAHs

2.6.1 Monitoring Description

Twenty-four-hour filter samples were taken at two mountain stations and two concurrent samples at the Elgin/Kelly station on July 10-11. Two of these samples were PM10 (inhalable particulate) and the other two were total suspended particulates (TSP, a larger size range of particles). The regular hivol network was operating on July 9 for the full 24-hour period. The same five station filters chosen for metals analysis, were also analysed for polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), products of incomplete combustion which are associated with particulate matter. Regular network samples were also run for 24 hours at three sites in the eastern industrial zone, including at Station #29531, Hillyard St. on July 9^th. A special continuous PAH monitor also operated at Station #29113, Gertrude/Depew Sts.

Respirable air particulate matter within the fire plume itself was sampled on July 11 and 12 by Dr. B. McCarry of McMaster University. PM10 samplers were installed on the northwest corner of the roof of an adjacent industrial building, about 10 m above ground level. Samples were taken from 5:30 pm to 10:30 pm on July 11 and from 10:30 pm to 3:00 am on July 11-12.

2.6.2 Monitoring Findings

On July 9, concentrations of the PAH benzo[a]pyrene at the five selected hivol stations all fell in the normal range of observations. The four ambient samples taken on July 10-11 at the three network stations on the mountain and downtown were all below the MOEE’s 24-hour objective for benzo[a]pyrene. The special continuous PAH monitor at Station #29113, Gertrude/Depew Sts. appeared to measure one brief peak from the fire.

Analysis of the samples that were taken within the plume was performed by staff of McMaster University . Their results revealed that the particulate matter was composed of 0.6% PAH by weight, a high proportion relative to the normal composition of airborne particles. Expressed in terms of loading of PAH to air during the fire, total PAH in the smoke plume was at a concentration of 4995 ng/m³.  Benzo[a]pyrene was present at a concentration of 354 ng/m³.

2.6.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation

The four ambient samples at the three network stations on the mountain and downtown on July 10-11 were all below the MOEE 24-hour objective for benzo[a]pyrene of 1.1 ng/m³. The mountain stations were not downwind of the fire, but the downtown site was partially downwind. The benzo[a]pyrene concentrations were normal. The five selected stations’ concentrations on July 9 all fell in the normal range of observations. It should be again be noted that these stations may have been impinged on by the fire for only an hour or two at most, out of their 24-hour running time. Of the regular network sampling done on July 9 for 24 hours at three sites in the eastern industrial zone, two sites had benzo[a]pyrene levels above the provincial objective however this was primarily a result of being downwind from the steel mills for most of the day.

The levels of PAH in the plume as measured by McMaster University exceeded typical levels for Hamilton air by 300-to 400-fold. The level of benzo[a]pyrene in the plume exceeded the MOEE’s 24-hour objective by over 300 times. If exposure was over a lifetime, levels this high could lead to an unacceptably increased risk of contracting lung cancer. However, these were levels in the plume, not in ambient air. Most people would not have been exposed to the peak PAH levels in the plume, but rather to lower levels outside of the plume or in indoor air,  therefore any exposure of the public would have been of short duration.

2.6.4 Follow-up Advice

Levels of PAH in air and deposited on vegetation (see Section 5) declined to normal ambient levels after the fire was extinguished. Exposure to elevated PAH levels during the fire is not expected to lead to any long-term adverse health effects.

2.7 PCBs

2.7.1 Monitoring Description

Sampling for these contaminants was conducted using adsorbent cartridges. Two samples were taken on the roof of an industrial building adjacent to the fire site about 10 metres above ground level on July 11-12, over 16- and 7-hour durations.

2.7.2 Monitoring Findings

The first sample measured 94.7 ng PCB/m³,and the second 2 µg/m³

2.7.3 Standards/Guidelines and Interpretation

The two samples were below the MOEE 24 hour objective of 150 ng/m³. The first sampler was downwind for most of the time. The second sampler appears to have been upwind as winds were mostly from the east during its run.

2.7.4 Follow-up Advice

The health risks resulting from this short-duration exposure are minimal as the standard is based on lifetime exposure.

2.8 Data from Network Stations

During the initial stages the effects of the fire could be measured at several monitoring stations in the city. The only pollutant detected by the network monitoring stations was particulate matter, measured by the coefficient-of-haze (COH) tape samplers. The mountain station was downwind for most of the first day and recorded four "COH hours" with values between 41 and 47 on the Air Quality Index (AQI) scale. Later, the downtown area was downwind and this is when the six or so hours of COH on the order of 35 on the AQI scale appeared (and when the dioxin sampling was being conducted). The Barton/Sanford Streets station recorded five elevated COH hours, at 34-68 on the AQI scale. As the winds became west and southwest on the 11^th and 12^th, only Station #29531 on Hillyard St. showed significant impact from the fire. This station, which is about 1500 metres from the fire, recorded four elevated hourly COHs from 33 to 68 on the AQI scale. Of note, the continuous PM10 monitor showed levels of 132 and 156 µg/m³ during the initial "hit" late on the evening of the 10^th.

Station #29561 on Homeside did not show significant COH peaks. The Beach Strip stations showed elevated levels of particulates but these could not be distinguished from regular industrial emissions.

It should be noted that when the COHs were elevated at the Elgin/Kelly station, the continuous PM10 readings were low, but at the Hillyard station, there was elevated PM10. This suggests that the particulates released were partially of respirable size. Carbon monoxide and nitrogen dioxide levels remained low during the "hits".

The network of hivols/PM10s (particulates, at 13 stations), VOC (at 5 stations) and PAHs (at 3 stations)were running as normally scheduled on July 9^th. The network of 11 dustfall jar samples (30 day exposures) will also be available for analysis if necessary.

Temperature inversions were noted during the nights of July 9-10 ,10-11 and 11-12, due to nocturnal cooling. Each dissipated by mid-morning with the sunlight.

Section 3 – Soot

3.1 Definition

Soot is composed of fine carbon particles which are components of smoke, resulting from the incomplete combustion of carbon-containing materials. The size of the particles is usually very small, 0.1 µm or less. Although very small in size, when together in sufficient amounts these particles are visible to the human eye. Various chemicals may be present on the surface of the particles such as dioxins, PAHs and metals depending on what materials were burned.

Exposure to soot particles would have been greatest during and immediately after the deposition of soot on outside surfaces. Rain and wind will displace some of the soot particles.

People can be exposed to soot particles by breathing them in or, more importantly, by ingesting them, e.g. through hand-to-mouth contact or through heating backyard fruit and vegetables that have soot on their surfaces. Because very young children (ages 1 to 4) often suck their fingers or put objects in their mouth, they will have the highest possibility for exposure.

Exposure to the soot from any fire should be minimized.

3.2 Dioxins in Soot

Ministry staff collected and analysed several swipe samples of soot within 1 to 5 km of the fire. These results are summarized in Table 3.1 below.

The levels of dioxin in soot-covered surfaces ranged from 0.1 to 2.9 nanograms TEQ/m² and were well below the acceptable limit of 25 ng TEQ/m², the level which Québec and New York recognize as an acceptable clean-up value. The surfaces covered with soot were within acceptable limits for dioxin and posed no health threat to residents.

Additional tests of soot deposited up to 5.5 km from the fire site showed levels of dioxins well below accepted clean-up guidelines, indicating no threat to health.

As a precaution, the Regional Public Health Department advised residents living within 1 km of the fire site to not allow children to play on lawns on which soot was visible, and to wear gloves while using mild detergent to clean up garden furniture and other outdoor items on which soot was deposited.

Estimates of human exposure via soot during and after the fire are provided in Section 6.

Table 3.1 - Dioxins in Soot Samples

* "TEQ": 2,3,7,8-TCDD toxic equivalent.
* indicates that the sample results were lower than levels in the laboratory blank.

3.3 Metals in Soot

The MOEE laboratory has analysed 10 samples of soot for the presence of lead, cadmium, nickel, chromium, zinc, copper, manganese, vanadium and iron, which represents the analytical spectrum of metals carried out in a routine metals analysis. Metals are expected to be present in the soot from any building fires where metal is present.

Analytical results confirmed the presence of some metals in the soot. Nickel, chromium, zinc, copper, manganese, vanadium and iron were detected in the soot samples. None of the samples contained detectable amounts of cadmium. Four of ten samples contained detectable amounts of lead. The highest lead level was found in a sample taken at an industrial "control" site located over 2 km from the fire. Lead and cadmium, the metals considered to be the most toxic in similar situations, were not detectable at the location that had the greatest amount of soot deposition.

Due to the limitation of the analytical method, it is not possible to quantitatively assess the potential health impacts of the metals in soot. However, the presence of these metals in the soot, particularly lead, support the advice given by public health officials to minimize personal exposure to the soot.

No numerical guidelines for metals in surface soot could be found from other jurisdictions or in the literature.

Section 4 - Surface Water Quality and Aquatic Toxicity Testing

4.1 Fate of Water at the Fire Site

Fire-fighting water either evaporated or ran off. The site runoff went mainly to three different areas:

• into the storm sewer and then into Hamilton Harbour via the Wellington St. slip,
• into the sanitary sewer, treated at the Woodward Ave. Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP), and released to Windermere Basin,
• captured, trucked away and treated

4.2 Monitoring Description

Chemical tests were conducted on: 1)runoff, 2)storm sewers, 3)storm sewer outfalls to Hamilton Harbour, and 4)the Wellington St. slip of Hamilton Harbour. Sanitary sewers were not sampled. Sample location information is given in Table 4.1.

Chemical tests consisted of analyses for 19 metals, 25 volatile organic chemicals, 74 other organic chemicals (including polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons or PAH), 9 general chemistry, and a complex analysis for the 210 different dioxins and furans. Total number of analyses was over 1700. Most samples were analysed by MOEE Laboratory Services Branch, but some initial samples were analysed by the Regional Municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth.

4.3 Monitoring Findings and Comparison with Standards

4.3.1 Site Runoff from the Fire

Data are provided in Tables 4.2, 4.3, 4.4 and 4.5.

Site runoff was sampled on two days only. Metal concentrations on July 10^thwere very high for 11 metals: aluminum, barium, cobalt, chromium, copper, iron, molybdenum, nickel, lead, vanadium and zinc. By July 11^th, eight metals were still considered high, but their concentrations had declined by 2- to 23-fold with the largest declines shown by copper and lead.

Volatile organic chemical concentrations (i.e., benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene) were high on July 10th but had declined by about half or more by July 11th.

Six PAH (polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons) concentrations were very high in runoff: naphthalene, 1-dimethylnaphthalene, 2-dimethylnaphthalene, fluorene, phenanthrene, and anthracene. The presence of PAH in fire runoff water is not surprising. Although these substances have very low solubility, they are formed during incomplete combustion such as occurred during the Plastimet fire. Phenols were also high, again probably released by the incomplete combustion of plastic.

Dioxins, other products of incomplete combustion, were elevated in undiluted fire site runoff, reaching 210 picograms toxic equivalents per litre (TEQ/L).

4.3.2 Storm Sewer Outfalls to Hamilton Harbour

Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQOs) were used here as a benchmark for assessing chemical concentrations, even though they only apply to ambient surface waters, i.e. outside any regulatory mixing zones which may exist.

Metal concentrations were 10- to 100-fold lower in the outfall than in the runoff, but exceeded their respective surface water PWQOs for copper, iron, lead, zinc and possibly aluminum.

Volatile organic chemicals and solvents were not detected in the storm sewer outfall.

PAHs were not present in the Wellington St. outfall. PAHs were found in outfall of the Woodward St. Water Pollution Control Plant at low concentrations. It is not possible to identify the fire as a source of these contaminants because PAHs also appear in the industrial inputs to the water pollution control plant.

4.3.3. Surface Water

Six metals exceeded Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) in the Wellington St. slip: aluminum, cadmium, copper, lead, silver and zinc. Iron was only slightly higher in one sample. Figure 4.1 below uses copper to illustrate the relationship over time amongst site runoff, storm sewer water, storm sewer outfall to the harbour and harbour water in the Wellington St. slip. These relationships were similar for most metals.

Although metal concentrations were higher than normal in the Wellington St. slip, they never reached the high concentrations seen in site runoff nor in storm sewers near the site. Water from the Wellington St. slip was, however, acutely toxic to rainbow trout and Daphnia (see Section 4.4 below, "Aquatic Toxicity Tests"), possibly due to the elevated metal concentrations. Four days after the fire, metal concentrations were within reported normal ranges for the harbour and below PWQO. Samples were no longer acutely toxic to trout or Daphnia.

One PAH was detected above the PWQO on July 12^th. Phenanthrene was detected at one location close to the storm sewer outfall and was not found on July 15^th. Two phthalates (chemicals used as plasticizers) were found in samples taken in the slip at concentrations exceeding the PWQO. However, these compounds were only detected on July 15^th and were found in all samples, including the upstream storm sewer samples and the sample blanks. This suggests that laboratory materials or analytical equipment may have been the source of phthalates in the water samples.

Three samples were taken for dioxins from Wellington St. slip on July 12^th. The sample nearest the outfall was somewhat elevated (5.5 pg/L TEQ), but the other two samples closer to the harbour had decreasing concentrations (0.6 and 0.01 pg/L TEQ). Although Canadian guidelines for dioxins and furans are still under development, U.S. guidance for the Great Lakes has set an ambient water quality guideline for the protection of wildlife (the most sensitive use) of 0.39 pg/L. Two of the three measurements exceeded this guideline, but it is expected that these exceedances were transient and would not have a significant impact on aquatic life or wildlife in and around the harbour.

Similarly, lasting impacts from the other contaminants arising from the fire are unlikely and most chemicals are now lower than the PWQOs. The Regional Municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth is trying to determine the source of aquatic toxicity in the sewer water.

Figure 4.1— Waterborne copper

Table 4.1 – Water Sampling Information

Sample ID	Field ID	Sample Description	Sample Location	Sampling		Parameters Analysed
				Date	Time
1W	D-1	fire run-off pond	NW Corner	10-Jul	00:20	metals, VOC MISA 19/20
2W	D-2	fire run-off pond	NE corner	10-Jul	00:25	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
3W	D-3	storm sewer outfall	Wellington Slip	10-Jul	00:30	metals, VOC, phenol
4W	10A	storm sewer	Wellington & Picton	10-Jul	09:00	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
5W	10B	storm sewer outfall	Wellington Slip	10-Jul	10:00	metals, VOC, phenol
6W	10C	fire run-off	Wellington St at Simcoe	10-Jul	11:00	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
7W	10E	storm sewer	U/S of Fire-Wellington@ Birge	10-Jul	12:30	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
8W	10F	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington Slip at mouth	10-Jul	13:15	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
9W	10F	fire run-off	Wellington St at Simcoe	10-Jul	15:00	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
10W	11A	storm sewer outfall	Wellington Slip	11-Jul	07:30	metals, VOC, phenol
11W	11B	storm sewer	@496 Wellington St	11-Jul	08:10	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
12W	11C	storm sewer	U/S of Fire-Wellington @ Birge	11-Jul	09:00	metals, MISA 19/20
13W	11D	fire run-off	Wellington St at Ferrie	11-Jul	10:30	metals, VOC,  MISA 19/20
14W	11E	fire run-off	Wellington St at Simcoe	11-Jul	15:10	metals, VOC,  MISA 19/20
15W	TOX-1	storm sewer outfall	Wellington Slip	11-Jul	11:30	metals, toxicity
16W	TOX-2	storm sewer	Upstream of Fire	11-Jul	15:00	metals, toxicity
17W	DIOX-1	fire run-off	Wellington St at Ferrie	11-Jul	12:15	dioxins
18W	WS-1	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington Slip-20m from sewer outfall	11-Jul	12:20	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
19W	WS-2	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington Slip-250m from sewer outfall	11-Jul	12:35	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
20W	WS-3	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington Slip-500m from sewer outfall	11-Jul	12:30	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
21W	WS-11	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington Slip-20m from sewer outfall	12-Jul	10:40	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
22W	WS-12	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington Slip-250m from sewer outfall	12-Jul	10:25	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
23W	WS-13	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington Slip-500m from sewer outfall	12-Jul	10:15	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
24W	WS-14	WPCP Effluent	Woodward WPCP Culver	12-Jul	11:45	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
25W	KB001	Hamilton Harbour	Near 300-block, Beach Blvd.	13-Jul	11:45	pH, solvent extraction *
26W	WS-21	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington slip-20m from sewer outfall	15-Jul	16:25	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20
27W	WS-22	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington slip-250m from sewer outfall	15-Jul	15:45	metals, VOC, phthalates
28W	WS-23	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington slip-500m from sewer outfall	15-Jul	15:15	metals, VOC, phthalates, toxicity
29W	WS-24	storm sewer	U/S of Fire-Wellington@Birge	15-Jul	13:45	metals, VOC, MISA 19/20, toxicity
30W	WS-25	Hamilton Harbour	Wellington slip-100m from sewer outfall	15-Jul	16:10	metals, VOC, phthalates, toxicity
31W	15A	ponded water, nw corner	NW corner of site	15-Jul	10:50	metals, VOC
32W	15B	storm  sewer	U/S of Fire-Wellington@Birge	15-Jul	13:00	metals, VOC
33W	TOX2	storm sewer outfall	Wellington Slip	15-Jul	unknown	toxicity

 

U/S" = upstream
"MISA 19/20" = aromatic base-neutrals (ABN), PAHs, phthalates
* 25W: grab sample of harbour water, contained only a negligible quantity of natural
silica and fats, not discussed further in text.

Table 4.2: Waterborne metals concentrations during the Plastimet fire - RMOH* data

Water quality data
Location: Plastimet, Hamilton

Analyzed by Regional Municipality of Hamilton Wentworth

Metals			Runoff for site			Storm Sewer								Outfall			Surface Water
																	WS-1	WS-2	WS-3
Parameters	PWQO	DWO	09-Jul	10-Jul		09-Jul					10-Jul			09-Jul			11-Jul
Time	ug/L		01:35	00:10		05:00	08:15	10:45	13:30	14:20	03:15	UNK		03:20	10:05		12:20	12:35	12:30
Aluminum	75 (pH 6			2140				100	3980		1100	1020					200	170
Arsenic	5	25 IMAC					100	100									<20	<20
Barium		1000 MAC		650					2610		710	400					60	40
Beryllium	1100		7	2						3	2	1		<1	<1		<1	<1
Cadmium	0.5	5 MAC	92	60		780	20	300	340	138	80	53		<1	<1		<1	<1
Chromium	100	50 MAC	181	31		1500	400	100	50	72	16	11		11	<2		<2	<2
Cobalt	0.6 i		20	6		100	100	100	20	<20	4	2		<20	<20		<1	<1
Copper	5	1000 AO	7370	70		14600	100	1900	4860	2320	600	360		130	100		80	120	70
Iron	300	300 AO	42000	11200		28900	11500	21600	33800	26100	8000	5990		1780	470		630	280	80
Lead	5	10 MAC	5450	710		9300	100	1500	3150	1820	510	350		50	30		30	10	<60
Manganese		50 AO	3140	580		2600	700	1900	1800	1240	59	50		120	70		71	52
Mercury	0.2	1.0 MAC					100	100
Molybdenum	10 i			23					220		56	24					<2	<2
Nickel	25		145	54		700	400	100	200	91	46	38		18	8		16	10
Selenium	100	10 MAC					100										58	52
Silver	0.1		50	<50						<50	<50	<50		<50	<50		<50	<50
Strontium			1120	480					840	770	810	830		370	360		380	360
Thallium	0.3i			80					130		90	90					60	60
Titanium																	<2	<2
Vanadium	7i																<1	<1
Zinc	20	5000 A0	17700	5360		97000	5600	39000	42600	15300	6450	4400		190	310		390	260	130

Notes:

< means "less than detection limits of analytical instrument used"
i: interim guideline
MAC: Maximum Acceptable Concentration for Health Related objectives
IMAC: Interim MAC
AO: Aesthetic Objective
PWQO: Provincial Water Quality Objective for the protection of aquatic life
DWO: Drinking Water Objective
Value exceeds PWQO

Table 4.3: Water – Metals (MOEE data)
 

Matrix : WATER – Metal Analysis

			Site Run-off							Storm Sewer
										U/S	D/S	U/S		D/S	U/S	U/S
Cross Reference Sample ID			10-Jul-97				11-Jul-97		15-Jul-97	10-Jul-97		11-Jul			15-Jul-97
			1W	2W	6W	9W	13W	14W	31W	7W	4W	12W	16W	11W	29W	32W	32W
			Sample ID #	D1	D2	10C	10F	11D	11E	15A	10D	10A	11C	TOX-2	11B	WS24	15B
Parameter (ppb)	PWQO	DWO											204				1970207
Aluminum	75	100 AO	11200	11320	3707	8971	983.7	317.4	4480	724.7	3307	43.67	60	1077	314	275	175
Barium		1000 MAC	3140	3810	2610	2570	524	650	293	69.6	1640	39.5	37	370	43.6	37	37
Beryllium	1100		1.014	0.702	1.404	0.7825	0.0825	0.1946	<	0.0753	1.616	<	<	0.1024	0.00481	<	<
Calcium (mg/l)			528	502	489	583	89.4	94.2	496	115	445	80	85.6	153	82.1	69.4	83.8
Cadmium	0.2	5 MAC	232.2	98.24	336.3	165.4	56.48	140.5	279	0.6189	262.9	<	<	56.04	0.031	<	<
Cobalt	0.6 i		39.8	24	23.5	23.2	2.57	4.36	7	<	14.1	<	3	1.64	0.331	<	<
Chromium	100	50 MAC	103	111	15.7	47.8	4.31	0.832	8	5.73	16.8	4	4	7.67	5.47	6	<
Copper	5	1000 AO	4550	3410	8180	3620	349	537	753	97.4	5480	20.7	31	469	67.8	61	46
Iron	300	300 AO	35500	30000	31000	32500	4790	1870	2610	486	25200	62.2	88	4970	131	110	71
Magnesium (mg/l)			58.4	45.3	26.1	47.6	13.9	11	135	27.4	31.2	23.2	23.8	27.4	24.1	20.7	23
Manganese		50 AO	2779	1824	1673	2048	317.9	421.4	2580	516.5	1468	41.57	32	501.3	42	36	33
Molybdenum	10 i		3.34	3.57	21.2	1.59	3.79	7.26	12	3.67	<	7.49	12	5.98	13.8	15	15
Nickel	25		90.4	67.6	180	91.7	19.6	33.5	<	10.3	104	0.597	<	24.1	1.37	<	<
Lead	25	10 MAC	3326	4081	5810	3344	324.2	357.5	2360	41.39	4064	<	<	505.9	7.06	<	<
Silver	0.1								3				3			3	4
Strontium			1090	1110	869	1080	395	295	5710	643	899	542	413	792	508	404	400
Titanium			118	111	0.498	29.8	7.69	3.92	14	47.6	5.96	<	<	7.61	2.6	<	2
Vanadium	7 i		35.86	24.82	7.784	19.91	<	<	<	2.186	8.467	<	<	1.637	0.606	<	<
Zinc	30	5000 MAC	31400	18400	70500	28300	5760	13600	17300	364	41900	20.4	27	5720	64.4	81	49

Notes:
< means "less than detection limits of analytical instrument used"
i: interim guideline
MAC: Maximum Acceptable Concentration for Health Related objectives
IMAC: Interim MAC
AO: Aesthetic Objective PWQO: Provincial Water Quality Objective for the protection of acquatic life
DWO: Drinking Water Objective
**: Samples submitted to RMOH Laboratory
Value exceeds PWQO

Table 4.3 cont d, : Water – Metals

Matrix : Water - Metal Analysis

			Sewer Outfall					WPCP Effluent Outfall
Cross Reference Sample ID			10-Jul-97		11-Jul-97		15-Jul-97	12-Jul-97
			3W	5W	10W	15W		24W
			D3	10B	11A	TOX-1	TOX-2	WS14
Parameter (ppb)	PWQO	DWO				203	01970206
Aluminum	75	100 AO	119.8	83.31	89.39	140	85	122.6
Barium		1000 MAC	47.6	51.4	59.4	66	30	20.2
Beryllium	1100		<	<	<	1	<	<
Calcium (mg/l)			54.7	54.1	59.2	60	53.2	61.9
Cadmium	0.2	5 MAC	54.7	1.841	2.109	4	<	<
Cobalt	0.6 i		<	<	<	<	<	<
Chromium	100	50 MAC	1.6	1.27	0.785	2	<	1.15
Copper	5	1000 AO	30	39.5	29.8	67	8	3.91
Iron	300	300 AO	421	256	310	381	60	1080
Magnesium (mg/l)			13.8	13.1	14.1	13.4	12.8	14.3
Manganese		50 AO	76.92	70.37	68.2	50	28	128.7
Molybdenum	10 i		1.94	1,48	1.71	8	8	5.47
Nickel	25		2.84	4,48	3.06	2	<	5.24
Lead	25	10 MAC	31.84	26.9	12.41	25	<	7.334
Silver	0.1						4
Strontium			393	371	405	1290	314	426
Titanium			4.78	<	<	2	<	<
Vanadium	7 i		<	<	<	<	<	<
Zinc	30	5000 MAC	43.4	32.8	342	332	24	24.3

Notes

< means "less than detection limits of analytical instrument used"

i: interim guideline

MAC: Maximum Acceptable Concentration for Health Related objectives

IMAC: Interim MAC

AO: Aesthetic Objective

PWQO: Provincial Water Quality Objective for the protection of aquatic life

DWO: Drinking Water Objective

**: Samples submitted to RMOH Laboratory

Value exceeds PWQO

 

Table 4.3 cont d.: Water – Metals

Matrix: WATER - Metal Analysis

			Wellington Slip												Harbour
			20m from outfall			100m from outfall		250m from outfall			500m from outfall				Mouth of slip	Historical Data 1992
Cross Reference Sample ID: Sample ID #			11-Jul-97	12-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	15-Jul-97		11-Jul-97	12-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	11-Jul-97	12-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	10-Jul-97	Hamilton Harbour
			18W	21W	26W	30W	30W	19W	22W	27W	20W	23W	28W	28W	8W
			WS1	WS1	WS21	WS25	WS25	WS2	WS12	WS22	WS3	WS13	WS23	WS23	10E	MAX	MIN
Parameter (ppb)	PWQO	DWO	NOTE **				1970208	NOTE**			NOTE **			1970209
Aluminum	75	100 AO		72.73	27.3	42.7	80		65.82	42.8		45.63	39.7	100	48.59	240	10
Barlum		1000 MAC		72.1	33	32.7	30		56	31.7		40.3	31.7	28	33.7
Beryllium	1100			<	0.00416	0.00223	<		<	0.00803		<	0.00696	<	<
Calcium (mg/l)				64.8	54.2	52.3	54.8		61.1	51.6		54.9	52.7	55	49.6
Cadmium	0.2	5 MAC		5.988	<	<	<		2.646	<		0.9071	0.376	<	<
Cobalt	0.6 i			<	<	<	<		<	<		<	<	<	0.678
Chromium	100	50 MAC		0.507	0.458	2.78	<		0.839	1.28		1.05	0.344	<	0.342	10	7
Copper	5	1000 AO		28.5	2.67	3.19	8		16.8	2.57		6.99	2.45	5	11.8	10	2
Iron	300	300 AO		303	46	91.2	139		228	84.9		111	71	95	122	420	20
Magnesium (mg/l)				14.9	14	13.5	13		14.5	13.3		13.5	13.6	13	12.2
Manganese		50 AO		98.4	11.2	45.1	29		73.32	40.9		52.92	45.7	23	33.34	67.4	4
Molybdenum	10 i			2.57	4.17	3.42	7		2.45	3.56		2.1	3.36	6	1.94
Nickel	25			3.9	1.91	1.69	<		2.38	2.2		2.26	2.11	<	1.79	7	2
Lead	25	10 MAC		13.29	2.14	16.1	<		<	8.87		7.169	2.83	<	9.854	7	5
Silver	0.1						5							4
Strontium				422	393	379	304		405	377		375	378	305	350
Titanium				<	0.236	0.57	<		<	0.495		<	0.324	<	<
Vanadium	7 i			<	0.372	0.544	<		0.167	1.12		<	0.214	<	<
Zinc	30	5000 MAC		534	9.64	22.8	17		575	16		132	12.9	8	101	27	8

Notes:

< means "less than detection limits of analytical instrument used "

i: interim guideline

MAC: Maximum Acceptable Concentration for Health Related objectives

IMAC: Interim MAC

AO: Aesthetic Objective

PWQO: Provincial Water Quality Objective for the protection of aquatic life

DWO: Drinking Water Objective

**: Samples submitted to RMOH Laboratory

Value exceeds PWQO

Table 4.4 : Water - VOCs

Matrix : Water - Organic Parameter

Cross Reference Sample ID: Sample ID#			Site Run-off								Storm Sewer						Sewer Outfall
											U/S	D/S	U/S	D/S	U/S	U/S
			10-Jul-97				11-Jul-97			15-Jul-97	10-Jul-97		11-Jul-97		15-Jul		10-Jul-97		11-Jul-97
			1W D1	2W D2	6W 10C	9W 10F	13W 11D	17W DIOX-1	14W 11E	31W 15A	7W 10D	4W 10A	12W 11C	11W 11B	29W WS24	32W 15B	3W D3	5W 10B	10W 11A
Parameter (ppb)	PWQO	DWO
Dichloromethane		50 MAC	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0		<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	BT	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0
t-1,2-dichloroethene			<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0		<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	BT	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0
1,1-dichloroethane	200 i		<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0		<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	BT	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0
Chloroform			4	3	4	2.7	7		9	2	6	4	BT	9	5	5	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,1,1-trichloroethane	10 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Benzene	100 i	5 MAC	830	580	460	590	200		170	22	7	410	BT	160	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Carbon tetrachloride		5 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Bromodichloromethane	200 i		1	1	<1.0	<1.0	2		2	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	1	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Trichloroethylene	20 i	50 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	54	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Toluene	0.8 i		370	290	230	290	100		84	4	2	180	BT	73	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,1,2-trichloroethane	800 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Tetrachloroethylene	50 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Dibromochloromethane			<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Chlorobenzene	15		21	12	13	14	5		7	<1.0	<1.0	11	BT	4	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Ethylbenzene	8 i		130	95	140	130	55		50	1	<1.0	88	BT	38	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
m/p-xylene	(m 2 i) (p 30 i)		15	11	15	11	5		5	<1.0	<1.0	10	BT	4	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Bromoform	60 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Styrene/ o-xylene	40 i		420	320	280	290	140		100	1	2	210	BT	85	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,3-dichlorobenzene	2.5		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,4-dichlorobenzene	4	5 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,2-dichlorobenzene	2.5	200 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Chloromethane (Methyl chloride)	700		150	120	120	96	31		36	7	6	100	BT	28	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Chloroethylene (Vinyl Chloride)	400 i	2 MAC	3	2	<1.0	2	<		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	1	BT	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Chlor oethane (Ethyl Chloride)			46	28	3	31	8		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	20	BT	6	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Dioxin/furans (pg/L) TEQ		15 pg/l IMAC						210		67

Notes : < means "less than detection limits of analytical instrument used

Blank fields means that samples were not taken for those parameters

 BT means sample broken in transit

Table 4.4, contd.: Water- VOCs

Matrix: Water - Organic Parameters

Cross Reference Sample ID: Sample ID #			WPCP	Wellington Slip										Harbour
			Outfall	20m from outfall			100m from outfall	250m from outfall			500m from outfall			Mouth of Slip
			12-Jul-97	11-Jul-97	12-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	11-Jul-97	12-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	11-Jul-97	12-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	10-Jul-97
			24W WS14	18W WS1	21W WS11	26W WS21	30W WS25	19W WS2	22W WS12	27W WS22	20W WS3	23W WS13	28W WS23	8W 10E
Parameter (ppb)	PWQO	DWO
Dichloromethane		50 MAC	<1.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<1.0	<2.0	<2.0	<1.0	<2.0	<2.0
t-1,2-dichloroethene			<1.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<1.0	<2.0	<2.0	<1.0	<2.0	<2.0
1,1-dichloroethane	200 i		<1.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<2.0	<1.0	<2.0	<2.0	<1.0	<2.0	<2.0
Chloroform			8	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,1,1-trichloroethane	10 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Benzene	100 i	5 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Carbon tetrachloride		5 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Bromodichloromethane	200 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Trichloroethylene	20 i	50 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Toluene	0.8 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,1,2-trichloroethane	800 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Tetrachloroethylene	50 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Dibromochloromethane			<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Chlorobenzene	15		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Ethylbenzene	8 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
m/p-xylene	(m 2 i) (p 30 i)		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Bromoform	60 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Styrene/ o-xylene	40 i		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,3-dichlorobenzene	2.5		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,4-dichlorobenzene	4	5 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
1,2-dichlorobenzene	2.5	200 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Chloromethane (Methyl chloride)	700		<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Chloroethylene (Vinyl Chloride)	400 i	2 MAC	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Chloroethane (Ethyl Chloride)			<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0	<1.0
Dioxin/furans (pg/L) TEQ		15 pg/l IMAC	0.02		5.5				0.6			0.01

Table 4.5: Water - PAH & ABN Matrix: Water - MISA 19/20 PARAMETERS E3265A

Cross Reference Sample ID: Sample ID #			Site Run–off							Storm Sewer						Sewer Outfall
										U/S		D/S	U/S		U/S
			10-Jul-97				11-Jul-97			10-Jul-97		11-Jul-97			15-Jul-97	10-Jul-97		11-Jul-97
			1W	2W	6W	9W	13W	14W		7W	4W	11W	12W		29W	3W	5W	10W
			D-1	D-2	10C	10F	11D	11E	15A	10D	10A	11B	11C	15B	WS24	D3	10B	11A
Parameter (ppb)	PWQO	ODWO
Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether
Phenol	1		5630	3310	3980	4270	1870	1420	191	7.6	3000	870	10.2	4.6	0.8	1	42	47.2
m-cresol
p-cresol	1															0.8 uis
Naphthalene	7		100	83	85	74	70	21	1.4	3	68	23	0.2	0.2	0.2	analyzed for
Indole							4 uis
2-methylnapthalene	2		15	&15	19	13	17	4.2	02.	0.4 uis	10	4.6
1-methylnaphthalene	2		17	17	20	14	18	5	0.5 uis	0.5 uis	12	5
2-chloronaphthalene	0.2		9.8 uis	10 uis	12	8 uis	10 uis	2.2 uis			5.6 uis	2.8 uis
BiPhenyl	0.2		9.8 uis	10 uis	12	8 uis	10 uis	2.2 uis			5.6 uis	2.8 uis
Acenaphthene			32 uis	35 uis	26 uis	21 uis	24 uis	6.6	0.4		20 uis	7 uis
2,6-dinitrotoluene	3
Acenaphthene			7.2 uis	6.8 uis	4.8 uis	2 uis	3.5 uis	0.8 uis	0.4 uis		2.8 uis	1 uis
Fluorene	0.2		7.6	10	12 uis	8 uis	15	2.8 uis	0.4		5.6	3.8
Phenanthrene	0.03		16	19	15	9	38	3.8			8.2	5.6	0.4
Anthracene	0.0008		6.2 uis	7.2	4.8 uis	2 uis	3.5 uis	0.8 uis	0.4 uis		2.8
Di-n-butylphthalate	4														17
5-nitroacenaphthene						5 uis
Fluoranthene	0.0008		2 uis	2.4 uis	2.8 uis	1 uis	9.4 uis	0.6 uis	0.2 uis		1.8 uis	1 uis	0.2
Pyrene			1.6 uis	2 uis	2.2 uis	0.4 uis	7.4 uis	0.6 uis	0.2 uis		1.6 uis	0.8 uis	0.2
Butylbenzylphthalate	0.2														2.5
Benz[a]anthracene	0.0004				1 uis		3.6 uis					0.4
Chrysene	0.0001				1.2 uis		4					0.4 uis
Bis-2-ethylhexylphthalate	0.6														29
Benzo[b]fluoranthene							1.6
Benzo[k]fluoranthene	0.0002						1.2 uis
Benzo[a]pyrene		0.01					1.2

 

Table 4.5, cont'd.: Water - PAH & ABN

Matrix: Water - MISA 19/20 PARAMETERS

Cross Reference Sample ID: Sample ID #			WPCP	Wellington Slip										Harbour
			Outfall	20m from outfall			100m from outfall	250m from outfall			500m from outfall			Mouth of Slip
			12-Jul-97	11-Jul-97	12-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	11-Jul-97	12-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	11-Jul-97	12-Jul-97	15-Jul-97	10-Jul-97
			24W WS14	18W WS1	21W WS11	26W WS21	30W WS25	19W WS2	22W WS12	27W WS22	20W WS3	23W WS13	28W WS23	8W 10E
Parameter (ppb)	PWQO	DWO
Bis(2–chloroethyl)ether
Phenol	1		0.8											10.8
m-cresol						0.2
p-cresol	1			3
Naphthalene	7		0.4		0.6						0.2
Indole
2-methylnaphthalene	2										0.4
1-methylnaphthalene	2				0.5
2-chloronaphthalene	0.2
Biphenyl	0.2								no;			no		no
Acenaphthylene				0.4	0.4				detects			detects		detects
2,6-dinitrotoluene	3													for PAH/ABN
Acenaphthene									detects
Fluorene	0.2				0.2
Phenanthrene	0.03				0.2
Anthracene	0.0008
Di-n-butylphthalate **	4					24	22			21			33
5-nitroacenaphthene
Fluoranthene	0.008		0.4
Pyrene			0.4
Butylbenzylphthalate	0.2
Benz[a]anthracene	0.0004		0.4 uis
Chrysene	0.0001		0.4
Bis-2-ethylhexylphthalate ***	0.6					2	2			1			1
Benzo[b]fluoranthene			0.4
Benzo[k]fluoranthene	0.0002		0.6
Benzo[a]pyrene		0.01	0.4

NOTE: 74 compound peaks analyzed for under MISA 19/20, only positive results shown here.
uis: These values cannot be accurately quantified
**–procedure blank contained Di-n-butylphthalate at 18 ug/L
***–procedure blank contained Bis-2-ethylhexylphthalate at 38 ug/L
blank cells means compound not detected
uis values should be considered approximate

4.4 Aquatic Toxicity Tests (Bioassays)

4.4.1 Monitoring Description

Standard acute lethality tests were conducted on water samples collected from four sites near the fire location. Acute lethality tests yield LC50 values which are defined as the concentration of material that results in 50% mortality of the test species.The tests were conducted in the  In these tests, rainbow trout were exposed Ministry’s aquatic toxicity laboratories in Etobicoke. In these tests, rainbow trout were exposed for a four-day period and Daphnia magna (water fleas, small planktonic crustaceans) were exposed for a two-day period.

Two sewer water samples were collected July 11th. One was from a sewer at the intersection of Wellington St. and Birge St., upstream of the fire location. The other was downstream of the fire location, in the sewer outfall to the Wellington St. Slip. On July 15th these sites were re-sampled and two more sites farther down the slip were sampled, 100 metres and 500 metres away from the sewer outfall.

4.4.2 Monitoring Findings

The LC50 toxicity test results are summarized below in Table 4.6. "NL" indicates that the sample was nonlethal as defined by the test procedure (i.e., within the accepted control mortality rate). "LC50 >100" means some animals died but not enough to calculate an LC50. A low LC50 signifies high toxicity.

Table 4.6 - Acute lethality of water samples collected near the fire location.

Sampling Location	Sampling date	Sample toxicity (% vol./vol.)		Comment on results of toxicity tests
	(1997)	Daphnia 2d-LC50	Trout 4d-LC50
Wellington St. Sewer at Birge St.	July 11	>100a	38	toxic sewer water
	July 15	>100b	43	toxic sewer water
Wellington St. Sewer at its outfall to the Wellington St. Slip	July 11	>100c	93	dilution of toxic sewer water
	July 15	NL	NL	nonlethal sewer water
Wellington St. Slip at 100 m	July 15	NL	NL	nonlethal receiver
Wellington St. Slip at 500 m	July 15	NL	NL	nonlethal receiver

Notes: a:2/72 dead; b:7/72 dead (probable toxicant - BOD); c: 9/72 dead (probable toxicant - oil droplets)

The results show that:

• The sewer samples upstream of the fire location were toxic to both test species,  particularly trout;
• Toxic effects were generally lower or non-detectable in samples from the Wellington  Street slip, downstream of the fire location.
• The July 11th Wellington Street slip outfall sample was slightly more toxic to Daphnia than the upstream sewer sample.

4.4.3 Standards/Guidelines/Benchmarks

Toxicity test results are used to prove water pollution in legal proceedings based on:

Fisheries Act 36(3)

...deposit of a deleterious substance of any type in water frequented by fish...

Ontario Water Resources Act 30 (1)

...any material of any kind... that may impair the quality of the water of any...

Environmental Protection Act 14(1)

...discharge of a contaminant into the natural environment...that causes or is likely to cause an adverse effect.

Starting in 1996, Ontario’s Clean Water Regulations (under the EPA) have limited toxic substances in the effluents discharged by nine industrial sectors. These regulations also set legally enforceable limits on whole effluent toxicity to aquatic life, as monitored by the two acute lethality tests. To pass the tests, at least 50% of the trout and at least 50% of the Daphnia must survive an exposure to an undiluted sample of effluent. In anticipation of the regulations, significant improvements have been achieved in the quality of Ontario’s industrial effluents. Toxicity monitoring indicates that most regulated dischargers now comply with the toxicity limits. Industrial effluent toxicity limits also are found in regulations under the federal Fisheries Act.

None of the above regulatory limits or other uses of toxicity tests are applied by government  agencies to control the quality of routine discharges to municipal sewers.

4.4.4 Interpretation

The impact of the fire on the toxicity to aquatic life was not as significant as the impact of the sewer itself. Acute lethality could not be detected in the slip. Fish were observed living in the  slip waters. The toxic effects observed in the sewer samples did not appear to extend into Hamilton Harbour.   

The July 11th Wellington St. Slip sample contained oil droplets physically toxic to Daphnia. Oils are commonly found in waters from urban-industrial areas. Motor vehicles leak petro-chemicals onto road surfaces which drain into sewers.Marine shipping operations release oils directly into Hamilton Harbour waters.The presence of an oily substance in the Wellington Street Slip cannot be attributed directly to the fire. In addition, the combined effects of high ammonia and low dissolved oxygen in the storm sewer could have contributed to the toxicity in the rainbow trout tests.

Environmental samples are complex and variable mixtures that may have unanticipated toxicants and toxicant interactions.Toxicity tests help address these uncertainties because they are direct measures of the combined effects of all constituents. For some water samples Daphnia is the more sensitive species, for other samples trout is more sensitive.Test results for both species give information necessary for decisions about protecting water quality.

The toxicity tests are designed primarily to measure the direct effects of water soluble substances such as zinc, ammonia, phenol, toluene and cyanide.Substances in this group may harm aquatic life when high concentrations are released to the environment.Some other contaminants such as dioxin pose an indirect threat because they can accumulate slowly through the food chain.The acute toxicity tests cannot be used to reach conclusions about the potential impacts that might be caused by substances such as dioxin.

4.4.5 Follow-up Advice

With regard to acute lethality concerns about the fire, site runoff is being collected and taken off-site for treatment. The Regional Municipality of Hamilton-Wentworth is going to investigate the source and cause of the sewer water toxicity.With prior consultation, the Ministry’s Standards Development Branch Aquatic Toxicology Section can test and report on further samples to assist in future investigations.

4.5 Summary of Water Quality and Aquatic Toxicity Analyses

Tests for more than 300 metals and organic chemicals (including 210 dioxins and furans) have been conducted on the fire runoff, storm sewer waters and water in the Wellington Street Slip of Hamilton Harbour. Some levels of metals, volatile organic chemicals and PAHs were high in the site runoff (fire-fighting water).These contaminants were lower in outfalls and still lower in Hamilton Harbour surface water, and declined with time.

Where detected in surface waters, most of these substances were present at low concentrations. Results were compared to existing MOEE Provincial Water Quality Objectives and one exceedance was found in Hamilton Harbour for the PAH phenanthrene, a product of combustion. Dioxins were also found, but at very low levels. Surface water in the Wellington St. slip also exceeded Provincial Water Quality Objectives (PWQO) for several metals after the fire.By July 15th, concentrations of most of the 65 chemicals were within reported ranges for Hamilton Harbour and most were within their respective PWQOs. These Objectives provide protection for

aquatic life from long term exposure and initial analyses indicate that the short term exposures resulting from the Plastimet fire should not pose any long-term threat to aquatic life in the harbour. Hamilton’s drinking water, which is drawn from some distance out in Lake Ontario, was not affected.

Based on laboratory bioassays, the runoff from the fire had some lethal effects on aquatic life. However, there was no evidence of a fish kill in Hamilton Harbour. Lasting impacts from runoff from the fire are unlikely since most measured chemical concentrations are now back within reported normal ranges, and most are lower than Provincial Water Quality Objectives.

Section 5 - Soil Quality and Phytotoxicity Studies

The Ministry’s Phytotoxicology Section conducted soil and vegetation investigations around the Plastimet fire site and elsewhere across Hamilton. Samples included soil from residential properties and parks, tree foliage, lawn grass, and garden produce from home vegetable gardens. All samples were analysed for dioxins, and some were also analysed for PAHs and metals.

The phytotoxicology sampling was accomplished in two stages.The first stage was conducted from July 12 to July 22, 1997 as part of the Plastimet emergency response.As a result of on vegetable gardens, additional soil, lawn grass, and vegetable samples were collected from 20 residential properties across Hamilton.This second stage of sampling, undertaken after discussions with a community committee, was conducted August 5, 6, and 7, 1997.The results from this community response part of the project is discussed separately in Section 5. 5.

The samples collected in stage two from the additional residential properties were analysed for dioxins by Environment Canada’s laboratory in Ottawa.All other analyses were conducted by the MOEE’s Laboratory Services Branch.

A summary of the Plastimet phytotoxicology sampling is provided in Table 5.1, below.

Table 5.1: Phytotoxicology Sample Summary Plastimet Fire - Hamilton

Parameter	Surface Soil	Maple Tree Foliage	Lawn Grass	Home Garden Produce
Number of Sites Sampled	34	15	25	28
Number of Samples Collected	34	19	25	31
Dates Sampled	July 12, 15 August 5, 6, 7	July 12, 15,17	July 22 August 5, 6	July 17, 22 August 5, 6
Samples Analysed for Metals	Yes 17 tests/sample)	Yes 18 tests/sample)	No	No
Samples Analysed for PAHs	Yes 16 tests/sample)	Yes 16 tests/sample)	Yes 16 tests/sample)	Yes 16 tests/sample)
Samples Analysed for Dioxins	Yes (25 tests/sample)	Yes (25 tests/sample)	Yes (25 tests/sample)	Yes (25 tests/sample)
Total Number of Analytical Tests	1,972	1,121	1,025	1,271
Total Number of samples = 109 Total Number of Analytical Tests = 5,389

5.1 Emergency Response Sampling – Soil Dioxin

Single samples of surface soil (0-5 cm depth) were collected from 13 sites on July 12 and July 14. All sample sites were publicly accessible and exposed to atmospheric fallout. Table 5.2. summarizes the dioxin concentrations in surface soil.All soil dioxin data is expressed as pg/g (picograms per gram, or parts per trillion) 2,3,7,8-T4CDD toxic equivalents, or TEQ.Although all dioxin levels were within the range encountered in Ontario urban soil (normally up to 130 pg/g) the two sites closest to the fire had the two highest concentrations, which were two to four times higher than levels elsewhere in the fire area.Site 1 (40 pg/g), immediately east of the fire site, is an undisturbed urban residential front yard.Site 7 (84 pg/g), immediately west of the fire site, is a small, open, undeveloped parkette adjacent to a rail spur.This property is currently owned by the City of Hamilton, but it was previously owned by TH&B Railroad.The land use history of this site is unknown and disturbance is likely, and so the possibility of a previous dioxin source that is at least partially responsible for the elevated level (relative to nearby soil dioxin levels) cannot be ruled out. Dioxins were released by the fire, and emissions from the fire did impact the area around Sites 1 and 7, therefore some of the dioxin in the soil at these two sites may have originated from the fire.

Dioxin is present in urban soil.In Ontario, in the absence of a known point source of dioxin emissions, soil dioxin concentrations in urban communities similar to Hamilton range from less than 1 pg/g to more than 100 pg/g TEQ.Therefore, even though the Plastimet fire cannot be ruled out as possibly contributing to soil dioxin levels at two of the 13 sample sites, even the highest soil dioxin concentrations are within the range normally encountered in Ontario urban soil and substantially below the health-based MOEE soil clean-up guideline of 1,000 pg TEQ/g. There is no background-based guideline for dioxins in urban Ontario soil.

5.2 Emergency Response Sampling – Soil PAHs

PAH is an acronym for polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons. Like dioxins, PAHs are common in low concentrations in urban soil.Table 5.3 summarizes the soil PAH data from the 13 soil sites. The data in Table 5.3 are compared with two MOEE guidelines, which are located in the far right column of the table.The number in brackets is the OTR, or Ontario Typical Range guideline. This is a background-based guideline that represents the upper range of PAHs in Ontario urban parkland soil (see Appendix 1).The other number in the guideline column is the health-based soil clean-up guideline.The clean-up guideline is not a trigger level that when exceeded requires an automatic site remediation.It is used to guide the clean-up of contaminated commercial or industrial properties that are being sold for redevelopment to residential or park land use (see Appendix 2).

Soil PAH concentrations above the OTR background-based guideline were detected at Sites 1, 3, 7, and 8. Occasional and marginal exceedences of this guideline are not uncommon in older urban residential communities. PAHs can originate from coal ash and petroleum products, such as home heating oil, gasoline, and waste motor oil.The pyrene concentration at Site 1 slightly exceeded the soil clean-up guideline.

Table 5.2: Hamilton Plastimet Fire Soil Dioxin Summary, Surface Soil 0-5 cm Depth, Sampled July 12, 1997

Site Number	Location	pg/g - TEQ
1	Clark & Burton	40
2	Mars & Wentworth	6.7
3	West & Barton	12
4	West &Evans	6.7
5	Murray & Catharine	4.3
6	Hughson & Robert	5.7
7	Simcoe & Ferguson	84
8	Burlington & Ferguson	4.5
9	Rosslyn & Maple	4.0
10	Gage Park, by Maplewood	13
11	Cunningham Public School	9.1
12	Potruff Rd	24
13	Gage Park, by Lawrence	18
14	Stoney Creek	not sampled
15	Jordan Harbour	not sampled
16	Niagara-on-the-Lake	not sampled
All data are pg/g (parts per trillion), 2,3,7,8-T CDD Toxic Equivalents, fresh weight, single samples. MOEE Residential Soil Clean-up Guideline = 1,000 pg/g TEQ.

Dioxins in soil from other urban centres

East Hamilton: Range 3.7 – 43 pg/g TEQ
Scarborough: Range <1 – 80 pg/g TEQ
Windsor: Range <1 – 131 pg/g TEQ

In contrast, all 16 PAH compounds at Site 7 exceeded the OTR guideline and 7 compounds exceeded the clean-up guidelines. The PAH contamination at Site 7 is unquestionably related to a historical use of the property. Although PAHs were emitted from the fire and contaminated the runoff water from the fire sight, it is unlikely that the contamination at Site 7 is solely from the fire, as the levels for some of the PAHs were very substantially elevated (e.g.,benzo(a)pyrene was more than 30 times the guideline)and the other sample sites at similar distances from the fire were not comparably contaminated.The soil PAH contamination at Site 7 is similar to the degree of contamination found at industrial work yards where roofing tar or coal tar has been stored or used.This is further evidence of site disturbance or historical soil contamination at Site 7, and may relate to the highest soil dioxin concentration also being found at this site.

Because of the nature of the contamination at Site 7, and because the extent of the contamination is unknown, the City of Hamilton has erected a temporary fence around the area and two adjacent parkettes. Additional soil sampling from these open spaces, and residential properties in the vicinity of these parkettes, was conducted August 5 and 6, 1997.Because this contamination was not related to the Plastimet fire the results of this additional sampling will be reported separately.

5.3 Emergency Response Sampling – Soil Metals

Ten of the 13 soil sample sites were analysed for 17 common metals.These included beryllium (Be), magnesium (Mg), aluminum (Al), calcium (Ca), vanadium (V), chromium (Cr), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe), cobalt (Co), nickel (Ni), copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), molybdenum (Mo), cadmium Cd), barium (Ba), lead (Pb), and strontium (Sr).Cd), barium (Ba), lead (Pb), and strontium (Sr). The soil data are compared with the OTR and clean-up guidelines.

Soil lead concentrations exceeding the health-based clean-up guideline occurred at 4 of 10 sample sites.This is common in an urban environment and is related to decades of use of leaded gasoline and a recent downwards revision of the lead guideline based on subtle clinical health effects of environmental lead on children.By comparison, more than 50% of the residential properties in old urban communities in Toronto exceed the soil lead guideline.

Nine of the 10 sample sites exceeded the OTR Zn guideline. Zinc was not identified as a  contaminant from the fire, however, the Plastimet site was formerly a metal recycling/smelting facility, and there was a quantity of zinc oxide on site from previous industrial activity. Therefore, Zn was likely a significant historical emission from this facility and these historical emissions are likely the reason for the locally elevated soil Zn concentrations. Even though the Zn levels were consistently above background, they were still less than one half of the effects-based soil clean-upguideline.

With the exception of Zn, which was not fire-related, there was no soil metal contamination gradient relative to the fire site. Soil metal concentrations were characteristic of an urban environment.The fire has not had a measurable impact on soil metal levels.

Table 5.3: PAH Concentrations in Soil from the Hamilton Plastimet Fire - Samples Collected July 12, 1997.

PAH Compound	Site 1	Site 2	Site 3	Site 4	Site 5	Site 6	Site 7	Site 8	Site 9	Site 10	Site 11	Site 12	Site 13	Guideline
Naphthalene	40T	20W	60T	20W	20W	40T	320	60T	20T	20W	20W	20W	20T	40,000(90)
Acenaphthylene	60T	20W	20T	20W	20W	20W	100T	40T	20T	20T	20W	20W	20W	100,000(90)
Acenaphthene	80T	20W	20T	20W	20W	20W	3900	20W	20T	20T	20W	20W	20W	1,000,000(70)
Fluorene	60T	20W	40T	20W	20W	20W	980	20W	20T	20W	20W	20W	20W	350,000(120)
Phenanthrene	1400	140T	440	120T	80T	140T	11000	260	260	180T	60T	20T	120T	40,000(690)
Anthracene	140T	20W	60T	20T	20W	20T	2700	40T	40T	20T	20W	20W	20W	28,000(160)
Fluoranthene	2100	300	860	240	180T	260	28000	540	400	380	160T	80T	220	40,000(1,100)
Pyrene	1600	220	680	180T	140T	200	24000	440	300	320	120T	60T	180T	250,000(1,100)
Benzo(a)anthracene	740	120T	360	100T	80T	120T	25000	340	180T	180T	80T	40T	120T	40,000(740)
Chrysene	860	140T	460	120T	100T	140T	25000	360	200	200T	120T	60T	140T	12,000(690)
Benzo(b)fluoranthene	1000	160T	480	140T	100T	160T	35000	460	240	240	100T	80T	160T	12,000 470)
Benzo(k)fluoranthene	660	100T	400	80T	60T	120T	31000	340	180T	160T	100T	60T	100T	12,000(480)
Benzo(a)pyrene	800	120T	400	120T	80T	160T	38000	400	200T	200T	80T	80T	120T	1,200(490)
Ideno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene	1200	160T	600	160T	120T	200T	36000	640	280T	280T	80T	80T	160T	12,000(380)
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene	240T	40W	40T	40W	40W	40W	7900	80T	40W	80T	40W	40W	40W	1,200 (160)
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene	560	80T	320T	80T	80T	120T	30000	320T	160T	160T	80T	40T	80T	40,000 (680)
Data are ng/g (parts per billion) fresh weight. Shaded data exceed guidelines. Guidelines are MOEE effects-based Soil Clean-up guidelines, numbers in brackets are background-based MOEE OTR guidelines. W - not detected, analytical detection limit provided for reference. T - a measurable trace amount, interpret with caution.

Table 5.4: Hamilton Plastimet Fire Soil Metal Summary*, Surface Soil 0 - 5 cm Depth.
Sampled July 12, 1997

Site	Street	Be	Mg	Al	Ca	V	Cr	Mn	Fe	Co	Ni	Cu	Zn	Mo	Cd	Ba	Pb	Sr
1	Clark & Burton	0.6 T	7000	11000	14000	31	29	810	25000	8.0	20	62	340	0.8 T	3.7	93	220	31
2	Mars & Wentworth	0.7 T	7700	15000	12000	37	32	1100	26000	11	21	51	240	0.8T	1.1	86	44	40
3	West & Barton	0.6 T	5800	12000	8600	35	30	850	24000	8.4	20	44	400	1.0 T	1.6	73	220	22
4	West & Evans	0.6 T	4300	12000	6200	33	29	680	21000	7.3	17	35	250	0.5W	1.2	110	180	21
5	Murray & Catharine	0.6 T	6200	12000	11000	32	27	800	23000	8.5	17	37	230	0.5 W	1.1	67	220	28
6	Hughson & Robert	0.5 W	6800	7800	40000	26	16	620	16000	5.5	11	30	98	0.5 W	0.5 T	45	27	74
7	Simcoe & Ferguson	0.5 W	9400	10000	20000	33	26	940	23000	7.5	17	110	380	0.5 W	1.3	84	220	41
8	Burlington & Ferguson	0.5 W	5200	9500	13000	30	20	720	21000	7.2	15	35	160	0.6 T	0.9 T	48	85	32
9	Rosslyn & Maple	0.6 T	3500	11000	5000	31	20	560	20000	7.1	16	31	200	0.5 W	1.1	88	110	23
10	Gage Park by Maplewood	0.5 W	2900	11000	3100	32	21	600	20000	6.8	16	41	230	0.9 T	1.2	53	160	15
OTR		0.97	16000	27000	58000	71	62	1300	33000	17	32	65	140	0.85	0.84	180	98	78
Clean-up		1.2	NG	NG	NG	250	1000	NG	NG	50	200	300	800	40	12	1000	200	NG
* Be - beryllium; Mg - magnesium; Al - aluminum; Ca - calcium; V - vanadium; Cr - chromium; Mn - manganese; Fe - iron; Co - cobalt; Ni - nickel; Cu - copper; Zn - zinc; Mo - molybdenum; Cd - cadmium; Ba - barium; Pb - lead; Sr - strontium. All data are ug/g (parts per million), dry weight OTR MOEE Ontario Typical Range (OTR98) for old urban parkland background-based guideline Clean-up MOEE effects-based soil clean-up guideline for residential/parkland T A measurable trace amount. Interpret with caution. W Below analytical detection limit, no measurable response (zero). NG No clean-up guideline available Shaded data exceed guidelines.

5.4 Emergency Response Sampling - Vegetation Dioxin

Vegetation sampling included leaves from mature street trees, lawn grass from residential properties, and garden produce from residential vegetable gardens. In the initial emergency response phase of the sampling, leaves from mature street trees were sampled instead of garden produce for the following reasons. There are no guidelines for dioxin in vegetation, and the MOEE has no background data for dioxin in urban garden produce, whereas Ontario background data is available for dioxin in urban maple tree foliage. Also, the street trees in the community affected by the fire were mature with large crowns that were very well exposed to the fire plume. In contrast, vegetable gardens are small and often sheltered from above and would have been less exposed to the fire plume. Finally, the street trees were well distributed, easy to find, and available for immediate sampling, whereas the gardens were not as well distributed, were much more difficult to find, and permission was required from the property occupants to gain access to the property and acquire a sample. For these reasons it was felt that street tree foliage would provide a more reliable indicator of dioxin emissions from the fire, and the information could be obtained more quickly. Garden produce was scheduled for sampling and was conducted as part of the second phase of the emergency response.

5.4.1 Street Tree Dioxin Emergency Response Sampling

Dioxin analysis was conducted on leaves collected from 16 mature maple street trees close to the fire, from more distant sites where soot fallout was observed, and from control sites as far away as Niagara-on-the-Lake. Table 5.5 summarizes the tree foliage dioxin data. Sites 1, 2, and 7, all very close to the fire, had dioxin concentrations ranging from 20 to 32 pg/g TEQ. All other sites were less than about 3 pg/g. Dioxins are not considered to be very mobile in soil and therefore not readily taken up by plants, and so it is unlikely that the elevated foliar dioxin is related to the elevated soil dioxin at two of the three sample sites (Sites 1 and 7). Soil dioxin did not contribute to the elevated foliar dioxin at Site 2, because the soil dioxin was not particularly high at this site.

There is very little foliar dioxin data with which to compare the Hamilton fire results, and there are no foliar dioxin guidelines. Foliar dioxin data collected from urban Windsor for the Detroit incinerator study is the only comparable data. These levels averaged between 2 and 3 pg/g and ranged up to 11 pg/g. Most Hamilton sites were similar to Windsor, but the three sites in Hamilton close to the fire site had foliar dioxin concentrations that were two to three times higher than the highest levels in Windsor. This strongly suggests that the elevated dioxin levels at three sites in Hamilton were related to emissions from the fire.

Table 5.6 summarizes foliar dioxin levels from the same trees at Sites 1 and 7 collected eight days after the fire (July 18) and after at least one heavy rain event. The foliar dioxin levels were reduced about 80%. Washing the samples in the field had little effect at further reducing tissue dioxin levels, indicating that most of the dioxin in the leaves from the first sampling on July 12 immediately after the fire was likely adhering to dust and other fire particulate debris on the foliar surface and was not incorporated into the leaf tissue. This would be consistent with dioxin-contaminated particulate fallout from the fire, such as soot.

Table 5.5: Hamilton Plastimet Fire Vegetation Dioxin Summary
Street Tree Maple Foliage
Samples Collected July 12, 1997

Site Number	Location	pg/g - TEQ*
1	Clark & Burton	32
2	Mars & Wentworth	28
3	West & Barton	3.1
4	West & Evans	2.8
5	Murray & Catharine	Trace (0.35)**
6	Hughson & Robert	Trace (0.51)**
7	Simcoe & Ferguson	20
8	Burlington & Ferguson	Not Detected (<1)**
9	Rosslyn & Maple	1.4
10	Gage Park, by Maplewood	Trace (0.38)**
11	Cunningham Public School	Trace (0.23)**
12	Potruff Rd	Trace (0.13)**
13	Gage Park, by Lawrence	Trace (0.93)**
14	Stoney Creek	Trace (0.18)**
15	Jordan Harbour	Not Detected (<1)**
16	Niagara-on-the-Lake	Not Detected (<1)**
* All data are pg/g (parts per trillion) 2,3,7,8-T4 CDD Toxic Equivalents TEQ), fresh weight, single sample. ** Detection limit is ~1 pg/g TEQ; "Trace" signifies a measurable trace amount, interpret value with caution (below method detection limit). There is no guideline for dioxin in foliage.

For comparison with dioxins in maple foliage from other urban centres: Windsor: Range <1 to 11 pg/g TEQ

Table 5.6: Dioxin Levels in Street Tree Foliage from the Sites with the Two Highest Concentrations: Before and After Rain, and with Additional Washing

Location	July 12 1 Day After Fire No Rain	July 18 8 Days After Fire 2 Rain Events
		Not Washed	Washed
Clark & Burton	32	8.8 (73% Reduction)	6.4 (80% Reduction)
Simcoe & Ferguson	20	4.0 (80% Reduction)	2.8 (86% Reduction)
All data are pg/g TEQ (=ppt TEQ)

Based on calculations made from soot swipe samples in areas where soot fallout was documented, soot from the Plastimet fire could add up to as much as 20 pg TEQ/g of dioxin to street tree maple foliage dioxin levels. This would bring the post-rainfall July 18 foliar dioxin street tree maple foliage dioxin levels. This would bring the post-rainfall July 18 foliar dioxinis remarkably close to the actual pre-rainfall July 12 levels of between 20 and 32 pg TEQ/g (Table 5.5). This is further corroboration that the elevated foliar dioxin levels at sites close to the fire were fire-related and that most of the dioxin in the vegetation was present in the form of surface-deposited dust and soot.

5.4.2 Street Tree PAH Emergency Response Sampling

Table 5.7 summarizes the PAH results for maple foliage samples from 16 sample sites. There are no guidelines for PAHs in vegetation and there is very little data from other Ontario urban sites with which to compare the Hamilton results. PAH concentrations are characteristically low in vegetation, mostly at the "W" (detection limit) or "T" (trace amount) levels. Anything above a "T" level usually indicates an ambient PAH source. Phenanthrene was the only compound that was elevated above a measurable trace concentration and this occurred only at Sites 1, 2, and 7, which are adjacent to the fire site. Like dioxins, PAHs are not readily taken up by plants, and so this marginal contamination in Hamilton likely reflects exposure to a recent ambient source. Because of the proximity of the three sample sites to the fire site, the elevated phenanthrene concentrations in maple foliage are likely associated with the fire. Similar phenanthrene levels occur in urban maple foliage in Welland at collection sites slightly distant from a known PAH source.

Table 5.7: PAH Concentrations in Street Tree Foliage from the Hamilton Plastimet Fire, Samples Collected July 12, 1997

PAH Compound	Site1	Site2	Site3	Site4	Site5	Site6	Site7	Site8	Site9	Site10	Site11	Site12	Site13	Site14	Site15	Site16
Naphthalene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Acenaphthylene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Acenaphthene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Fluorene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Phenanthrene	380	180	80T	80T	60T	40T	360	40T	40T	20W	20T	20W	20T	20W	20W	20W
Anthracene	20T	20T	20W	20W	20W	20W	60T	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Fluoranthene	180T	140T	120T	140T	60T	40T	120T	20W	40T	20W	20T	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Pyrene	100T	80T	60T	80T	40T	40T	60T	20W	20W	20W	20T	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Benzo(a)anthracene	60T	40T	20T	40T	20W	20W	20T	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Chrysene	100T	80T	60T	100T	60T	40T	40T	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Benzo(b)fluoranthene	40T	20T	20W	40T	20T	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Benzo(k)fluoranthene	20T	20T	20W	40T	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Benzo(a)pyrene	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W
Ideno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W
Data are ng/g (parts per billion) fresh weight, single samples. W – below analytical detection limit, no measurable response (zero), detection limit provided for reference. T – a measurable trace amount, interpret with caution There are no guidelines for PAHs in tree foliage.

5.4.3 Street Tree Metals Emergency Response Sampling

Table 5.8 summarizes the street tree metal results. There was no vegetation metal contamination gradient relative to the fire site. Vegetation metal concentrations were characteristic of an urban environment. Marginal exceedences of the manganese Upper Limit of Normal guideline for urban foliage at three sites were not fire-related. Manganese is a trace nutrient that is occasionally elevated in urban vegetation and is likely related to commercial fertilizer applications. The fire did not have a measurable impact on metal levels of urban street trees

5.4.4 Vegetable Garden Dioxin Emergency Response Sampling

On July 17 the first samples of leaf lettuce and tomato fruit were sampled from residential gardens closest to Sites 1 and 7, where the highest dioxin levels were found in street tree leaves, and from a control garden in Ancaster. On July 22 five more gardens were sampled. Two of these gardens were in the immediate fire area, and two were from gardens at considerable distance from the fire site but which had heavy soot fallout. The fifth garden was another control site, this time from the Oakville area. All of these samples were split into washed and not-washed subsamples, to duplicate the washing process used by most gardeners in cleaning and preparing home grown vegetables for consumption. The dioxin concentrations from all vegetable produce samples from all locations were below the analytical detection limit (about 1 pg/g TEQ). Even if soot-deposited dioxin resulted in detectable dioxin levels in produce elsewhere in the fire or soot fallout areas, the July 12 and July 17 sampling of contaminated street tree foliage clearly indicated that the dioxin levels can be substantially reduced by washing the tissue. In addition, the literature indicates that the half life of dioxin in vegetation is about 15 to 20 days. This relatively rapid loss is associated with photodegradation (dioxin breaks down into non-toxic compounds when exposed to direct sunlight). The location of the sampled gardens is summarized in Table 5.9.

Estimates of human exposure via leafy vegetables during and after the fire are provided in Section 6.

5.4.5 Vegetable Garden PAH Emergency Response Sampling

PAHs are not readily taken up by plants from contaminated soil and so PAHs are not usually detected in vegetable produce unless there is a nearby ambient PAH source. The PAH vegetable garden results are summarized in Table 5.10. A single PAH compound was detected in a single sample. A chard sample had a trace level (40 ng/g) of naphthalene. This level was so marginally elevated that the lab qualified the result with the comment a measurable trace amount, interpret with caution.

Table 5.8: Hamilton Plastimet Fire Metals in Street Tree Foliage, Collected July 12, 1997.

Site	Street	Al	Be	Ba	B	Ca	Cd	Co	Cu	Cr	Fe	Mg	Mn	Mo	Ni	Pb	Sr	V	Zn
1	Clark & Burton	64	0.2 W	8.7	73	18000	0.1 W	0.2 W	9.5	1.0 T	430	3000	82	0.5 T	0.6 T	2.4 T	45	0.5 W	39
2	Mars & Wentworth	50	0.2 W	5.3	70	14000	0.1 W	0.2 W	6.1	0.9 T	360	3000	100	0.2 W	0.7 T	3.6	60	0.5 W	27
3	West & Barton	46	0.2 W	5.7	44	9400	0.1 W	0.2 W	20	1.0 T	320	2100	81	0.2	0.7 T	2.0 T	48	0.5 W	48
4	West & Evans	81	0.2 W	7.4	72	14000	0.1 W	0.2 W	5.3	1.4 T	510	2300	79	0.2 W	0.5 W	2.9	37	0.5 W	28
5	Murray & Catharine	47	0.2 W	5.0	35	7800	0.1 W	0.2 W	0.2 W	0.9 T	340	2600	56	0.2 W	0.5 W	0.9 T	35	0.5 W	0.5 W
6	Hughson & Robert	51	0.2 W	6.0	77	16000	0.1 W	0.2 W	9.7	1.0 T	440	2700	210	0.2 W	0.5 W	1.7 T	50	0.5 W	27
7	Simcoe & Ferguson	55	0.2 W	5.3	140	15000	0.1 W	0.2 W	7.8	0.6 T	280	3500	82	0.2 W	0.5 W	3.6	44	0.5 W	24
8	Burlington & Ferguson	40	0.2 W	4.9	87	16000	0.1 W	0.2 W	13	0.5 W	220	2400	41	0.2 W	0.5 W	1.1 T	35	0.5 W	35
9	Rosslyn & Maple	46	0.2 W	7.1	49	17000	0.1 W	0.2 W	7.4	0.6 T	210	2700	52	0.2 W	0.5 W	1.8	57	0.5 W	22
10	Gage Park by Maplewood	47	0.2 W	12	48	11000	0.3 T	0.2 W	5.8	0.7 T	190	2600	550	0.2 W	0.8 T	0.5 W	33	0.5 W	64
11	Cunningham Public School	54	0.2 W	15	55	19000	0.2 T	0.2 W	6.7	0.6 T	200	2300	100	0.2 W	0.5 W	2.2 T	48	0.5 W	40
12	Potruff Road	54	0.2 W	3.0	30	5000	0.1 W	0.2 W	9.9	0.6 T	160	2100	49	0.2 W	0.5 W	1.1 T	26	0.5 W	27
13	Gage Park by Lawrence	42	0.2 W	7.3	30	12000	0.1 W	0.2 W	6.7	0.5 W	190	2200	190	0.3 T	0.5 W	0.7 T	34	0.5 W	26
14	Stoney Creek	48	0.2 W	11	50	15000	0.1 W	0.2 W	12	0.5 W	130	2300	51	51	5.4	0.5 W	32	0.5 W	28
15	Jordan Harbour	50	0.2 500W	15	46	17000	0.1 W	0.2 W	6.9	0.5 W	93	2200	81	0.2 W	0.7 T	0.7 T	49	0.5 W	18
16	Niagara-on-the-Lake	47	0.2 W	2.5	28	5800	0.1 W	0.2 W	6.8	0.5 W	100	1600	70	0.2 W	0.5 W	0.9 T	15	0.5 W	28
ULN		500	NG	NG	175	30000	2	2	20	8	1000	7000	100	1.5	7	60	NG	5	250
* Be - beryllium; Mg - magnesium; Al - aluminum; Ca - calcium; V - vanadium; Cr - chromium; Mn - manganese; Fe - iron; Co - cobalt; Ni - nickel; Cu - copper; Zn - zinc; Mo - molybdenum; Cd - cadmium; Ba - barium; Pb - lead; Sr - strontium. All data are ug/g (parts per million), dry weight. ULN - MOEE background-based Upper Limit of Normal Guidelines for maple foliage. T - A measurable trace amount. Interpret with caution. W - Below analytical detection limit, no measurable response (zero), detection limit provided for reference.- . NG - No guideline available. Shaded data exceed guidelines.

Table 5.9: Results of Dioxin Analysis of Home Garden Produce, Plastimet Fire - Hamilton Samples Collected July 17 and July 22, 1997

Site Number Location	Date Collected	Produce Type	Dioxin Concentration*
Site 17 Burton & Emerald	July 17	Tomato Fruit not washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 17 Burton & Emerald	July 17	Tomato Fruit washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 18 Ferrie & Wellington	July 17	Leaf Lettuce not washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 18 Ferrie & Wellington	July 17	Leaf Lettuce washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 20 Mohawk & Upper Gage	July 22	Swiss Chard not washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 21 Mountain Brow & Upper Ottawa	July 22	Leaf Lettuce not washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 22 Gage & Cannon	July 22	Leaf Lettuce not washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 23 Barton & Queen	July 22	Leaf Lettuce not washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 19 Fidlers Green & HWY 403 Ancaster Control	July 17	Leaf Lettuce washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 19 Fidlers Green & HWY 403 Ancaster Control	July 17	Leaf Lettuce not washed	N.D. (<1)
Site 24 Walkers Line & New St Burlington Control	July 22	Leaf Lettuce not washed	N.D. (<1)
*pg/g (parts per trillion) fresh weight as 2,3,7,8-T CDD Toxic Equivalents (TEQ) "N.D." = not detected (i.e., below detection limit) Detection limit ~1 pg/g TEQ There are no guidelines for dioxin in garden produce.

Table 5.10: Results of PAH Analysis of Home Garden Produce, Hamilton Plastimet Fire, Samples Collected July 18 and July 22, 1997.

PAH compound	Site 20 mohawk & upper gage chard-July 22	Site 21 Mountain Brow & upper Ottawa Lettuce-July 22	Site 22 Gage & Cannon Lettuce-July 22	Site 23 Barton  Queen Lettuce-July 22	Site 18 Ferrie & Wellington Lettuce-July 18 Not washed	Site 18 Ferrie & Wellington Lettuce-July 18 Washed	Site 19 Fidlers Green & Hwy 403 Lettuce-July 18 Washed Ancaster Control	Site 19 Fidlers Green & Hwy 403 Lettuce-July 18 Washed Ancaster Control	Site 24 Walkers LIne & New St Burlington Control
Naphthalene	40T	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Acenaphthylene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Acenaphthene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Fluorene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Phenanthrene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Anthracene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Fluoranthene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Pyrene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Benzo(a)anthracene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Chrysene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Benzo(b)fluoranthene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Benzo(k)fluoranthene	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W	20W
Benzo(a)pyrene	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W
Ideno(1,2,3-c,d)pyrene	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W
Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W
Benzo(g,h,i)perylene	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W	40W
All data are ng/g (parts per billion), fresh weight, single samples. W - no measurable response (zero), analytical detection limit provided for reference. T - a measurable trace amount, interpret with caution. There are no guidelines for PAHs in garden produce.

5.4.6 Lawn Grass Dioxin Emergency Response Sampling

At the request of the Medical Officer of Health lawn grass from residential properties was collected from 5 sites July 22, 1997. This request was made after the public meeting when it became apparent that dioxin in soot from the fire was easily washed off, and the soot that wasn't washed away via the storm sewers would likely end up on the surface of grass, which in turn could create an exposure pathway for children.

The lawn grass dioxin results are summarized in Table 5.11. There are no guidelines for dioxin in urban lawn grass, and the MOEE has no Ontario background lawn grass dioxin data with which to compare these results. The lawn grass dioxin concentrations were all very low, ranging from 0 to 0.05 pg TEQ/g. There was no relationship to either soot deposition or distance to the fire site. For example, Sites 20 and 21 both reported heavy soot fallout, which could lead to abundant soot wash-out onto the grass. However, one site had the highest and the other site had the lowest dioxin concentration. The two sites closest to the fire site and adjacent to the two highest street tree dioxin concentrations had the next lowest dioxin levels. Although this is a very small data set, it illustrates that these extremely trace dioxin levels were not likely related to the fire, or to soot wash-out subsequent to the fire. Even if the dioxin levels were fire-related, the dioxin is surface deposited and exposed to direct sunlight, therefore photodegradation would rapidly reduce the dioxin concentrations to non-detectable levels in from two to four weeks.

5.5 Community Response Sampling of Soil, Lawn Grass, and Vegetables

At the Community Committee meeting of July 30, 1997, a strategy was developed to deal with the issue of additional soil and vegetation sampling for concerned residents. One hundred and sixty two names were obtained from a sign up list at the public meeting held July 21, 1997, and from the Plastimet Fire Hot Line at the MOEE Hamilton District Office. Incomplete information and/or duplication of names on the two lists resulted in a final list comprised of 133 properties. The properties were plotted on a map and overlaid with the fire plume tracking data and reported soot fallout. Forty properties were chosen to represent neighbourhoods relative to the plume characteristics. MOEE scientists took this information into the field August 5 and 6 and started at the top of the list of the 40 preselected properties and worked downwards. If a property met the sample criteria (1– had a vegetable garden, a lawn, and undisturbed soil, 2- the garden was not directly shaded, so it could have received soot fallout, 3-the lawn and garden were adequately maintained, and 4 – the resident confirmed that to the best of their knowledge organochlorine pesticides have not been used on the property) it was sampled. If all of these criteria were not met the field crew proceeded to the next property on the list. This process was continued until 20 properties had been sampled.

Single samples of lawn grass, surface soil (0-5 cm), and a leafy garden vegetable were collected from each of the 20 Hamilton properties, for a total of 60 samples. At the request of the mayor of Haldimand, a soil sample was also collected from the playground of Seneca Central School (school officials observed soot fallout in the school yard). All samples were analysed for dioxins and furans at the Environment Canada laboratory in Ottawa. Enough sample material was collected and stored at the MOEE Phytotoxicology laboratory to allow for PAH and metals analysis at a later date, if the community work group decides to proceed with that option.

The results of the analysis are summarized in Table 5.12. Soil dioxin levels ranged from 1.37 pg/g TEQ to 28.2 pg/g TEQ. These levels are comparable to the results obtained from the independent sampling and analysis of Hamilton public green spaces conducted by members of the community working group. The results are also consistent with soil dioxin levels in other Ontario urban communities, and well below the MOEE health-based clean-up guideline of 1,000 pg/g TEQ.

The lawn grass dioxin levels ranged from 0.022 pg/g TEQ to 0.467 pg/g TEQ. The dixoin  concentrations detected in vegetables ranged from 0.019 pg/g TEQ to 0.676 pg/g TEQ. The Environment Canada laboratory provided dioxin vegetation results to a lower detection limit and to a finer resolution then the MOEE dioxin laboratory, which analysed all the samples collected in July as part of the Plastimet emergency response. For example, the MOEE lab reported vegetable results to <1pg/g, whereas Environment Canada did not report a detection limit and calculated the dioxin TEQ to three decimal places. This is less a function of laboratory ability and more a function of the way the TEQ is calculated.

There is very little data on dioxin levels in vegetables, there is almost none from Ontario urban home gardens. Very limited information from Ontario rural locations suggests that dioxin vegetable levels are in the range of 0.05 to 0.10 pg/g TEQ. The MOEE has dioxin data for tree foliage from rural and urban Ontario communities that suggests urban dioxin vegetation concentrations are, on average, about 10 times higher than rural levels. A similar concentration gradient exists for soil, that is urban soil has about 10 times or more dioxin that rural soil. This simply reflects the greater number of potential dioxin sources there are in an urban environment and the effectiveness of vegetation in filtering material from the air. It is reasonable to assume that vegetable produce has a similar rural:urban concentration gradient, which suggests that home garden produce grown in an urban community may have up to about 1 pg/g TEQ. This is well within the range of vegetable dioxin results obtained from the 20 residential properties.

In the absence of dioxin vegetation guidelines another means of determining if the observed dioxin concentrations may be related to the Plastimet fire is to confirm a contamination gradient relative to the fire site or areas of heavy soot fallout. Even with the first set of soil and vegetation (grass and vegetable) results included with the data from the 20 residential properties there is no consistent pattern of contamination. The highest vegetable and the second highest lawn grass dioxin concentrations occurred at the sample site that is closest to the heavy industrial operations north of Burlington St. These industries, and other heavy manufacturing activities along the Hamilton waterfront, contribute to the dioxin loading in the urban Hamilton airshed.

These residential dioxin data were reviewed by health risk assessment scientists in the Ministry’s Standards Development Branch. Using Health Canada national food intake factors for specific vegetable groups and assuming consumption of the highest dioxin levels, the additional dioxin intake is a very small fraction of the recommended total daily intake. Consequently, there are no health concerns from exposure to the levels of dioxin found in Hamilton area vegetables or soil.

5.6 Vegetation Injury

Hydrogen chloride (HCl) was generated by the Plastimet fire. Vegetation injury characteristic of HCl gas was observed around the fire site on July 12 and 14. Although severe in nature, the injury was very localized. It was bounded approximately by Ferguson Ave. N on the west, Ferrie St. E on the north, about half way between Wellington St. N and Victoria Ave. N on the east, and extended only marginally below Birge St on the south. No vegetation injury was observed on residential properties (including vegetable gardens) adjacent to the injury zone. Samples were collected for storage and reference in the MOEE Phytotoxicology Herbarium.

Hydrogen chloride gas is corrosive and reactive. It does not accumulate in vegetation, rather the gas enters through the leaf's stomates and reacts immediately with the internal cellular tissue creating characteristic foliar burning symptoms. Although in chronic exposure situations HCl gas can cause plant mortality, most exposures are through accidental releases, such as the Plastimet fire. Under acute conditions, such as the fire, HCl injury can be very severe, but when the exposure is stopped the plants usually recover.

Table 5.13 summarizes the species of vegetation that were observed to be injured by HCl.

Table 5.11: Results of Dioxin Analysis of Lawn Grass, Plastimet Fire - Hamilton Samples Collected July 22, 1997

Site Number Location	Dioxin Concentration*
Site 20 Mohawk & Upper Gage	not detected
Site 21Mountain Brow & Upper Ottawa	0.05
Site 22 Gage & Cannon	0.01
Site 23 Barton & Queen	0.01
Site 24 Walker’s Line & New St Burlington Control	not detected
* pg/g (parts per trillion) fresh weight as 2,3,7,8-T CDD Toxic Equivalents (TEQ) There are no guidelines for dioxin in lawn grass.

Table 5.12: Dioxin Concentrations in Soil, Lawn Grass, and Garden Vegetables in Hamilton.
Plastimet Fire: Phase 2 Residential Property Sampling - August 5-8, 1997

Property Co-ordinates	Soil	Lawn Grass	Vegetable	Vegetable Type
Burlington St & Wellington St	12.8	0.078	0.086	Chard
Catharine St & Burlington St	5.61	0.237	0.093	Beet
Cranbrook Dr & Greendate Dr	2.18	0.037	0.209	Lettuce
Deschene Ave & Lascombe St	4.24	0.077	0.065	Radicchio
East 16 thSt & Concession St th	8.67	0.084	0.151	Parsley
Erindale Ave & Montrose Ave	5.77	0.022	0.062	Kale
Fairleigh Cres & Cumberland Ave	7.83	0.226	0.226	Basil
Hillcrest Ave & Dundurn St	28.2	0.121	0.270	Chard
Niagara St & Land St	12.5	0.354	0.676	Celery
Hughson St & Strachan St	13.0	0.088	0.034	Radicchio
Hughson St & Burlington St	6.42	0.036	0.019	Lettuce
Longwood Rd & Deveon Place	10.2	0.191	0.062	Chard
Nightingale St & Wentworth St	4.96	0.062	0.280	Mint
Rosemont Ave & Barnesdale St	13.0	0.278	0.072	Basil
Stirton St & Huron St	9.43	0.158	0.099	Celery
Victoria Ave & Evans St	16.5*	0.270.	0.042	Chard
Mary St & Strachan St	9.32	0.176	00.042	Lettuce
Simcoe St & Catherine St	12.7	0.042	0.112	Endive
Murray St & John St	7.04	0.467	0.132	Basil
West Ave & Robert St	4.13	0.058	0.183	Lettuce
21 -Seneca Central School (Haldimand, Ont.)	1.37	Not Collected	Not Collected	Not Collected
All concentrations are parts per trillion, 2,3,7,8-T CDD toxic equivalents, fresh weight. Analysis conducted by Environment Canada (Ottawa) laboratory. Soil data rounded to three significant digits. MOEE Soil Clean-up Guideline for residential land use = 1,000 ppt. There are no guidelines for grass and vegetables. * may be as much as 30% low due to poor recovery of H7CDD.

Table 5.13: Summary of Vegetation Injury in the Vicinity of the Hamilton Plastimet Fire

Species	Scientific name	Area Covered
		Simcoe at Wellington	Railroad Ferguson to Wellington	Railroad Simcoe to Wellington	Ferrie E of Wellington
Manitoba Maple	Acer negundo	S	M-S	S
Norway Maple	Acer platanoides	M		M
Tree-of-Heaven	Ailanthus altissima		VS	S
Paper Birch	Betula papyrifera		VS
Apple	Malus pumila		S
White Mulberry	Morus alba	T			L-M
Balsam Poplar	Populus balsmifera		S
Multiflora Rose	Rosa multiflora		S
American Elm	Ulmus americana		LM
Common Milkweed	Asclepias syriaca	L	VS
Lamb's Quarters	Chenopodium album		VS
Wild Carrot	Daucus carota	S	VS
Blueweed	Echium vulgare	S
Hop	Humulus lupulus	T			T
Motherwort	Leonurus cardiaca	L-M		S
Toadflax	Linaria vulgaris	T-L	VS
Common Mallow	Malva neglecta			L
Evening Primrose	Oenothera biennis	M
Thicket Creeper	Parthenocissus inserta		L-M	T
Japanese Knotweed	Polygonum cuspidatum	L-M
Curled Dock	Rumex crispus	L-M
Bladder Campion	Silene vulgaris	T-L		L
Common Mullein	Verbascum thapsus				L-M
Wild Grape	Vitis riparia		VS		OK
Silvery Cinquefoil	Potentilla argentea		VS
Rough-fruited Cinquefoil	Potentilla norvegica	L
Everlasting Pea	Lathyrus sativus			L-M
Black Medick	Medicago lupulina	L-M
White Sweet Clover	Melilotus alba	L	S
White Clover	Trifolium repens	L
Ragweed	Ambrosia artemesiiolia	L
Burdock	Arctium minus	L-M		T
Chickory	Chichorium intybus	L
Bull Thistle	Cirsium vulgare	S	VS
Jerusalem Artichoke	Helianthus tuberosus			L-M
Prickly Lettuce	Lactuca seriola	L-M	VS
Goat's-beard	Tragopogon dubius	M-S
Aster sp.	Aster sp.	S	VS		S
Heath Aster	Virgulus ericoides	M-S
Goldenrod	Solidago canadensis	S	VS	S
Field Horsetail	Equisetum arvense		S
Orchard Grass	Dactylis glomerata	M
Twitch Grass	Elymus repens	L-M

5.7 Conclusions

The following conclusions can be drawn from the phytotoxicology sampling of the Plastimet fire in relation to its impact on the terrestrial environment.

• The fire has not had a measurable impact on soil dioxin levels. All soil dioxin levels were within a range typical of an urban environment and substantially below the health–based soil clean–up guideline.
• The fire resulted in dioxin levels in street tree foliage that were between 2 and 3 times higher than normal for an Ontario urban community to a distance of about three residential blocks from the fire site. The dioxin was present mostly as a surface deposit and was readily washed off by rain. After 1 week the highest foliar dioxin levels had been reduced to within the range typical of an urban environment.
• Sampling of residential gardens revealed no detectable dioxin (<1 pg/g TEQ) in vegetable produce in the areas of highest soil and tree foliage dioxin concentrations and in areas where soot fallout was documented.
• Soil PAH contamination at Site 7 is too high to be related to the fire and is likely related to historical contamination at this site. Marginally elevated soil PAH levels at Sites 1 and 3 may be fire related.
• Marginally elevated phenanthrene levels in street tree foliage at Sites 1, 2, and 7 are likely fire related.
• The fire had no measurable impact on soil and vegetation metal concentrations.
• There was no relationship between dioxin levels in lawn grass and distance from the fire site or areas of substantial soot fallout.
• Dioxin levels in vegetation (street tree foliage) fell by more than 80% in the two weeks subsequent to the fire, confirming that most of the dioxin that landed on vegetation of all types was in the form of surface deposited dust and soot, which readily washed off or rapidly photodegraded.
• The community response sampling of 20 residential properties conducted in August confirmed that one month after the fire there was no measurable residual dioxin contamination of soil and vegetation, including home garden produce. A health assessment by MOEE toxicologists concluded residential garden vegetables were safe to eat and that there is no health risk to children playing in backyards and parks. Normal use of property has not been affected.

Section 6 - Dioxin Emission and Exposure Estimates

This section provides estimates regarding the levels of dioxins released by the fire and of dioxin intake during the fire, as well as supplementary information on dioxins in various media, both "background" and after other fires.

6.1 Estimates of Total Dioxin Releases from the Plastimet Fire

The total dioxin released during the fire has been estimated using air dispersion back–calculations. The starting point for estimating an emission rate for the intensely burning phase of the fire (July 9th and 10th) was the 24-hour average concentration of 19 pg TEQ/m3 measured on July 10th at the Elgin/Kelly AQI station. For the latter half of the fire, the plume was not rising very much and was impinging immediately downwind of the fire. A sample taken within the plume, from the roof of an adjacent industrial building, by Dr. B. McCarry of McMaster University from 5 pm on July 11th to 3 am on July 12th gave a concentration of 1000 pg TEQ/m³. This sample was used to estimate emissions of dioxins for the latter half of the fire.

The dispersion calculations used hour by hour wind data from a downtown monitor to estimate the air concentration patterns for the two monitoring periods (i.e., 24 hours on July 10th and 10 hours on July 11/12th). The back calculation gave dioxin emissions of about 10 g TEQ during the intensely burning phase of the fire (over a 28 hour period) and about 3 g TEQ during the later half of the fire (over a 30 hour period).

Because the wind speeds were very light and the wind directions were variable, the number of hours that the Elgin/Kelly sample was exposed to fumes from the fire was uncertain. Correspondingly, the back calculation of the dioxin emission rates for the first portion of the fire has a large uncertainty.

The dioxin sample taken from 8 am to 3 pm on July 12th at Sawyer St. downwind of the fire site measured 2.8 pg TEQ/m³ The dioxin emission rate required to give such a concentration would be more than 100 times smaller than the estimate for the intensely burning portion of the fire.

A range of emission estimates were obtained from the scientific literature. On the basis of statements that 200 to 400 tonnes of PVC were burnt and using U.S. EPA emission factors for U.S. hospital incinerators (most of which have uncontrolled emissions, i.e., little or no air pollution control equipment, and burn a high percentage of plastics in the waste), simulated open burning of non-metallic automobile "fluff", shredded material from car interiors, belts and hoses, which is mainly plastic with some rubber components (material very similar to the recycled plastic at the Plastimet site), emissions are ranging from 0.6 to 29 g TEQ can be calculated.

There are no official estimates of total dioxin emissions from all combustion sources for Canada. The 1994 U.S. EPA dioxin exposure estimate document quotes a central TEQ emission estimate for all U.S. sources of 9300 g / yr. A 1995 document by Cohen et. al., (CBNS, Queens College, New York) quotes a estimate for the total amount of dioxins deposited to the Great Lakes from sources in the U.S. and Canada as 42 g TEQ / yr (range 13 to 124 g TEQ / yr).

6.2 Dioxin Intake During the Fire

Dioxin intakes were estimated by calculating intakes on a normal day (for example, on the day before the fire), the four days of the fire and the day after. Two levels of exposure were evaluated. The main one took into account information from recent studies of personal exposures to airborne contaminants in Hamilton-Wentworth and is felt to be a more realistic exposure model. This realistic exposure model takes into account the fact that on a typical working day, most people are indoors either at home, in the workplace or in public buildings, stores, etc., for about 85% of the day. In addition, monitoring of airborne contaminants indicates that the indoor air concentration of pollutants emitted into outdoor air, like the fire, tends to be about half the outdoor air concentration. The realistic exposure model also assumes that people avoided contact with soot and did not eat backyard produce, consequently only the 50^th percentile values of measured or modelled concentrations for soot, vegetables, etc. were used. A second worst case exposure model was also used which assumed mainly outdoor exposure, consumption of unwashed leafy vegetables and getting one’s hands black with soot. This worst case exposure estimate uses either the maximum or 90^th percentile value of dioxin TEQ analysed in the air, soot, soil and vegetation.

Smoke inhalation – It was assumed that the fire started 8pm Wed. July 9^th (day 1), and 19 pg TEQ/m³ was inhaled until midnight of the following day (day 2). Based on the modelling described above, 125 pg TEQ/m³ or 225 pg TEQ/m³ was inhaled on day 3 until 6 am of day 4. On day 4 (when the fire was out), 2.8 pg TEQ/m3 was inhaled all day. On day 5, 0.6 pg TEQ/m³ (value found at this location one week later) was inhaled all day. Air was inhaled at 20 m³ / 70 kg adult / day.

Leafy vegetable consumption – It was assumed that leafy vegetables were consumed at 20 g/adult /day (this is the Health Canada food intake factor for this food group) from the middle of day 2 to the middle of day 4. The range of dioxin concentrations found on tree foliage sampled on day 4 and day 6 (after the fire was out) ranged from non detect to 32 pg TEQ / gram. The 50^th percentile dioxin concentration on foliage was 0.45 pg TEQ / g (90^th percentile – - 24 pg TEQ / g). The use of this 90^th percentile value as a surrogate for backyard leafy vegetables is a worst case estimate and assumes that unwashed leafy vegetables were eaten. This is unlikely to have occurred. All backyard vegetable samples taken a week later were non-detect. Consequently dioxin intake estimates associated with leafy vegetable consumption may range from negligible to the worst case 90^th percentile value.

Soot exposure – It was assumed that people absorbed the dioxin on soots covering 200 cm² of skin ( about the area of both palms of the hands) every day from midday on day 2. The soot concentrations found ranged from non detect to 2.9 ng TEQ / m². The 50^th percentile soot concentration was 0.1 ng TEQ / m² or 2 pg TEQ / 200 cm² (90^th percentile - 1.7 ng TEQ / m² or 34 pg TEQ / 200 cm² ).

Background – Canadian estimates of daily intakes from normal background levels of dioxin in air, water, food, soil and consumer products of people living near the Great Lakes (like Hamilton) - about 2.5 to 2.8 pg TEQ/ kg / day.

Table 6.1 below shows realistic and worst case estimates of daily intakes during the fire. The realistic estimates are also illustrated in Figure 6.1. These estimates assume that the person absorbed all the dioxin that they were exposed to (this is an exaggeration since dioxins are not absorbed well). People who remained indoors, did not eat leafy backyard vegetables and who avoided soot exposure clearly had substantially lower exposures. These estimates suggest that the recommended Canadian Tolerable Daily Intake of 10 pg TEQ / kg body weight /day may have been exceeded (about two-fold) for some people during the fire on day 3. Given the marked drop in dioxin levels in soot and on vegetation both with distance from the fire and in the week following the fire, it is unlikely that this TDI was exceeded for most people during the fire.

Table 6.1 - Estimates of Personal Dioxin Intakes during the Plastimet Fire

Day	Realistic Exposure	Worst case exposure
	pg TEQ / kg body weight /day
Day before the fire	2.8 (0.3)*	2.8 (0.3)*
Day 1	3.6 (0.4)	4.2 (0.4)
Day 2	6.1 (0.6)	12 (1.2)
Day 3	23.5 (2.4)	74.5 (7.5)
Day 4	8.3 (0.8)	23.4 (2.3)
Day 5	2.9 (0.3)	3.5 (0.4)
* ratio of estimated exposure to the Canadian Tolerable Daily Intake of 10 pg TEQ / kg body weight/day

Plastimet Fire - Daily Dioxin IntakeÊ

Realistic case - Not-evacuated zone

Figure 6.1 – Realistic–Case Estimates of Daily Dioxin Intake

The maximum estimated daily intake (worst case) could have been about seven to eight times higher than the TDI, or about a weeks exposure in one or more days. Given that normal daily exposure is less than one third of the TDI on a year round basis, getting one week’s exposure over a few days of the year is not anticipated to have any long term effect on dioxin body burden (this is the amount of dioxin retained by the body) or health. In fact, the worst case exposure only would have increased the body burden by less than two percent. It should be noted that the TDI has a 100-fold safety factor.

To illustrate the relationship between one’s daily exposure rate and its effect on one’s body burden, it might help to think of a small drip of water into a large rain barrel (Figure 6.2). This barrel also has a small leak to represent the amount of dioxins that we eliminate every day. Our body burden is about 6 ng TEQ / kg body weight (a recent Canadian estimate of the dioxin body burden for people living near the Great Lakes - like Hamilton) or about 420 ng TEQ per average adult. We can think of this as 420 gallons in the barrel (this would fill a barrel 4 ft wide to a height of 6 ft). Our normal daily intake of 2.8 pg TEQ / kg is about 0.2 ng TEQ / average adult or about 4 cups of water dripping into the barrel every day. If we assume that it takes about 9 years for one half the dioxin coming into our bodies to be eliminated (this is called the half life) then the daily amount of dioxin that we lose each day is about 0.1 ng TEQ / average adult or about 2 cups of water dripping out of the barrel. This would be the situation before and after the fire and for most of the year. In the case of the realistic assessment, the daily intake on day 3 may have risen to 23.5 pg TEQ or about 1.65 ng / average adult or about 33 cups (about 1 and a half gallons - 1 gallon = 20 cups). The addition of this 1.65 ng TEQ to the 420 ng TEQ is less than a half of a percent increase and would be lost from the body burden in 2 to 3 weeks. For the worst case situation, the daily intake on day 3 may have risen to 74.5 pg TEQ / kg or about 5.2 ng TEQ / average adult. This worst case intake is equivalent to 104 cups (just over 5 gallons). The addition of 5.2 ng TEQ to the 420 ng TEQ is just over a one percent increase and would be lost from the body burden in about 2 months.

6.3 Comparison of the Estimated Plastimet Fire Dioxin Exposures with Exposures associated with Known Adverse Effects in Humans

There are a number of reports of illness in people exposed to dioxins accidentally or occupationally or through consuming contaminated diets. Some of these studies cannot be used because dioxin levels were not measured at the time of the incident even if they were measured many years later. In other cases, the effect of dioxin in the exposure is complicated by the presence of high levels of PCBs or other chemicals at the same time. Adverse health effects in humans may be immediate (brought on by a sudden increase in dioxin exposure usually over a short time period – examples are, a skin disorder called chloracne and disturbances of blood chemistry) or chronic (due to prolonged exposure to elevated levels of dioxin – examples are cancer, diabetes, reproductive and child development problems). For this comparison, information on human dioxin levels associated with the Seveso incident in Italy (Pocarelli et al., 1991) and the Times Beach contamination in Missouri (Andrews et al., 1989) was used. Using a recent Canadian estimate of the dioxin body burden for people living near the Great Lakes (about 6 ng TEQ / kg body weight – the estimated intake of dioxins during the fire would only have increased the body burden by two percent) and the lowest measured body burden of dioxin in people who developed chloracne at Seveso or Times Beach (about 165 to 240 ng TEQ / kg body weight), it can seen that the body burden related to normal daily exposure including exposure to this fire is still at least 1/30th to 1/40th the lowest short term exposure associated with an adverse human health effect.

To relate daily intakes or exposures to body burden, one has to estimate how the body burden changes as the daily intake changes. To do this, one has to estimate the buildup of dioxin in the body at the same time that dioxins are being eliminated. The body burden is the dynamic balance between these two processes. Body burdens were calculated using first order kinetics for dioxin buildup and a half life of nine years to account for dioxin elimination (the half life is the time it takes for one half of the dioxin present at the beginning of the time period to be eliminated). The current body burden was used as a starting point. In order for residents to accumulate body burdens of dioxins associated with health effects, the maximum worst case exposure rate (about seven times the TDI) would have to be maintained every day for seven years. At the maximum realistic exposure rate (about two times the TDI), exposure would have to occur every day for over 36 years to achieve this body burden.

Figure 6.2 –. Illustration of dioxin intake, body burden and dioxin elimination.

6.4 Supplementary Data on Dioxins in Fires and Background Levels

The information on dioxin levels found in fires shown in Table 6.2 below indicates that while the dioxin levels in smoke and soot arising from the Plastimet fire were many times higher than normal everyday exposures. The dioxin levels were consistent with a large PVC fire or open burning of a large garbage pile.  

Table 6.2 - Dioxin Levels in Various Fires & Background

Medium	Location / Situation	Levels	Attribution
Air	Plastimet (July 9 – 18, 1997)	0.59 to 19 pg TEQ / m3	this report
Air	Wood stoves (in chimney)	19 to 214 pg TEQ / m3	German and Danish studies
Air	Large public bonfires (U.K.) – about 200 m away	0.6 to 16 pg TEQ / m3	Dyke et al., 1997
Air	Large open landfill fires (Finland)	51 to 427 pg TEQ / m3	Ruokojarvi et al., 1995
Air	Tobacco smoke (mainstream)	108 to 2143 pg TEQ / m3	German and Japanese studies
Air (background)	Windsor (1989 - 1992)	Mean: 0.23 pg TEQ / m3 Range: 0.012 to 1.73 pg TEQ / m3	MOEE 1994
Air (background)	Hamilton (1991 - 1995)	Mean: 0.079 pg TEQ / m 3 Range: 0.013 to 0.194 pg TEQ / m3	MOEE unpublished
Vegetation (background)	Plastimet (July 9 – 18, 1997)	non detect to 32 pg TEQ / g	this report
Vegetation (background)	Windsor - urban foliage	0.32 to 11 pg TEQ / g	MOEE unpublished
Soot	Plastimet (July 9 – 18, 1997)	non detect to 2.9 ng TEQ/ m2	this report
Soot	Large PVC warehouse fire (Sweden, 1987) - 200 m to 1.5 km away	1.4 to 20 ng TEQ/ m2	Marklund et al., 1989
Soot / Soil	Toronto street sweepings	1.3 to 179 pg TEQ / g	City of Toronto, 1987
Soil (background)	Windsor - urban soil	0.1 to 131 pg TEQ / g	MOEE unpublished
Soil (background)	Urban soils in Ontario and U.S. Midwest	0.1 to 79 pg TEQ / g	Birmingham 1990

Section 7 - Outcome

It is unlikely that any adverse effects on human or environmental health will occur in the long term as a result of the Plastimet fire. This is consistent with public statements issued by the Hamilton-Wentworth Regional Health Department. Within days after the fire was extinguished, the substances tested for had returned to concentrations within or close to the normal urban background range in all media — air, water, soil (off-site) and vegetation — except where prior soil and storm sewer water contamination existed.

Hydrogen chloride (HCl), which forms hydrochloric acid in the lungs and if dissolved in water, would likely have been the cause of most of the acute health effects reported during the course of the fire including skin, throat and eye irritation. HCl would also have caused the metal corrosion reported in the area close to the fire. HCl was produced only while the fire was burning, and any that was produced was neutralised quickly by dilution with water and by reacting with naturally occurring alkaline material in soil. Other substances such as dioxins, benzene and PAHs may cause health effects upon long-term exposure, however exposure during the fire was of short duration.

Based on laboratory bioassays, the water runoff from the fire had some lethal effects on aquatic life. However, there was no evidence of fish kills in Hamilton Harbour. Lasting impacts from the runoff from the fire are unlikely since most measured chemical concentrations returned to levels within normal reported ranges, and most are lower than Provincial Water Quality Objectives.

The community response sampling of 20 residential properties conducted in August confirmed that one month after the fire there was no measurable residual dioxin contamination of soil and vegetation, including home garden produce. A health assessment by MOEE toxicologists concluded that residential garden vegetables were safe to eat and that there is no health risk to children playing in backyards and parks. Normal use of property has not been affected.

Appendix 1

Derivation and Significance of the MOEE "Ontario Typical Range" Soil Guidelines

The MOEE "Ontario Typical Range" (OTR) guidelines are being developed to assist in interpreting analytical data and evaluating source-related impacts on the terrestrial environment. The OTRs are used to determine if the level of a chemical parameter in soil, plants, moss bags, or snow is significantly greater than the normal background range. An exceedence of the OTR₉₈ (the OTR₉₈ is the actual guideline number) may indicate the presence of a potential point source of contamination.

The OTR₉₈ represents the expected range of concentrations of chemical parameters in surface soil, plants, moss bags,  and snow from areas in Ontario not subjected to the influence of known point sources of pollution. The OTR₉₈ represents 97.5 percent of the data in the OTR distribution. This is equivalent to the mean plus two standard deviations, which is similar to the previous MOEE "Upper Limit of Normal" (ULN) guidelines. In other words, 98 out of every 100 background samples should be lower than the OTR₉₈.

The OTR₉₈ may vary between land use categories even in the absence of a point source of pollution because of natural variation and the amount and type of human activity, both past and present. Therefore, OTRs are being developed for several land use categories. The three main land use categories are Rural, New Urban, and Old Urban. Urban is defined as an area that has municipal water and sewage services. Old Urban is any area that has been developed as an urban area for more than 40 years. Rural is all other areas. These major land use categories are further broken into three subcategories; Parkland (which includes greenbelts and woodlands), Residential, and Industrial (which includes heavy industry, commercial properties such as malls, and transportation rights-of-way). Rural also includes an Agricultural category.

The OTR guidelines apply only to samples collected using standard MOEE sampling, sample preparation, and analytical protocols. Because the background data were collected in Ontario, the OTRs represent Ontario environmental conditions.

The OTRs are not the only means by which results are interpreted. Data interpretation should involve reviewing results from control samples, examining all the survey data for evidence of a pattern of contamination relative to the suspected source, and where available, comparison with effects-based guidelines. The OTRs are particularly useful where there is uncertainty regarding local background concentrations and/or insufficient samples were collected to determine a contamination gradient. OTRs are also used to determine where in the anticipated range a result falls. This can identify a potential concern even when a result falls within the guideline. For example, if all of the results from a survey are close to the OTR98 this could indicate that the local environment has been contaminated above the anticipated average, and therefore the pollution source should be more closely monitored.

The OTRs identify a range of chemical parameters resulting from natural variation and normal human activity. As a result, it must be stressed that values falling within a specific OTR₉₈should not be considered as acceptable or desirable levels; nor does the OTR₉₈ imply toxicity to plants, animals or humans.  Rather, the OTR₉₈ is a level which, if exceeded, prompts further investigation on a case by case basis to determine the significance, if any, of the above normal concentration. Incidental, isolated or spurious exceedences of an OTR₉₈ do not necessarily indicate a need for regulatory or abatement activity. However, repeated and/or extensive exceedences of an OTR₉₈ that appears to be related to a potential pollution source does indicate the need for a thorough evaluation of the regulatory or abatement program.

The OTR₉₈supersedes the phytotoxicology ULN guideline. The OTR program is on-going. The number of OTRs will be continuously updated as sampling is completed for the various land use categories and sample types. For more information on these guidelines please refer to Ontario Typical Range of Chemical Parameters in Soil, Vegetation, Moss Bags, and Snow. MOEE Report Number HCB-151-3512-93, PIBS # 2792, ISBN 0-778-1979-1.

Appendix 2

Derivation and Significance of the MOEE Soil Remediation Criteria (Clean-up Guidelines)

The MOEE Soil Remediation Criteria have been developed to provide guidance in cleaning up contaminated soil. They are not action levels, in that an exceedence of one or more of the criteria does not automatically mean that a clean-up must be conducted. A site clean-up may be conducted when a contaminated property is sold and/or the land use is changed. For example, the owner of an industrial property who plans to sell his/her land to a developer who intends to build residential homes can use the Remediation Criteria to clean up the soil to meet the residential land use criteria. This will allow the site to be reused for residential land-use without concern for adverse effects.

When contamination is found at a site where a change in land-use is not planned, the criteria may be used to assist in making decisions about adverse effects and the need for remediation. This is different from the previously described situation where a decision to change the land-use has already been made and the level of remediation required to rule out the potential for adverse effects is established by the new land use. Decisions on the need to undertake remedial action when the criteria are exceeded, and where the land use is not changing, require consideration of factors such as:

• thedemonstrated presence or likelihood of an adverse effect (on and off property);
• an understanding of the type of protection provided by the criteria gained through knowledge of the exposure pathways and receptors which were considered in the development of the criteria, and through understanding how that combination of pathways and receptors relate to those which could be found at the site;
• an understanding of the relationship between dose and health response for sensitive receptors from all exposure pathways, including the safety and uncertainty factors that have been used in the development of the criteria;
• an understanding of the environmental characteristics of the contaminants and of the site conditions that could influence the migration of the contaminants and how this effects their exposure and response characteristics.

In each case, the decision to undertake or not undertake site remediation should entail all of these factors plus any additional factors specific to the site in question. When the decision is made that remedial action is needed, the criteria can be used as clean-up targets. If these criteria are unacceptable to the proponent undertaking the remediation, they have an option to develop local back-ground-based criteria or conduct a site specific risk assessment.

The Soil Remediation Criteria are effects-based concentrations set to protect against the potential for adverse effects to human health, ecological health, and the natural environment, whichever is the most sensitive. By protecting the most sensitive parameter the rest of the environment is protected by default. There are different Soil Remediation Criteria for soil texture, soil depth, and ground water use. The criteria have also been established so that there will not be a potential for adverse effects through contaminant transfer from soil to indoor air, from ground water or surface water through release of volatile gases, from leaching of contaminants in soil to ground water, or from ground water discharge to surface water. However, use of these criteria may not ensure that corrosive, explosive, or unstable soil conditions will be eliminated.

The Soil Remediation Criteria were developed from published U.S. EPA and Ontario environmental data bases. Currently there are criteria for about 25 inorganic elements and about 90 organic compounds. Criteria were developed only if there were sufficient, defendable, effects-based data on the potential to cause an adverse effect. All of the criteria address human health and aquatic toxicity, but terrestrial ecological toxicity information was not available for all elements or compounds. The development of Soil Remediation Criteria is a continuous program, and criteria for more elements and compounds will be developed as additional environmental data become available. Similarly, new information could result in future modifications to the existing criteria.

For more information on the Remediation Criteria please refer to the Guideline for Use at Contaminated Sites in Ontario. Revised December 1996, Ontario Ministry of Environment and Energy, PIBS # 3161E01, ISBN 0-7778-5905-X.