Jump to main content.


Research Project Search
 Enter Search Term:
   
 NCER Advanced Search

Development of Arsenic Sediment Quality Criteria using Equilibrium Partitioning

EPA Grant Number: R830844
Title: Development of Arsenic Sediment Quality Criteria using Equilibrium Partitioning
Investigators: Visviki, Ioanna , Farley, Kevin J. , Judge, Michael L. , Mahony, John D.
Current Investigators: Visviki, Ioanna , Carbonaro, Richard F. , Judge, Michael L. , Mahony, John D.
Institution: College of Mount Saint Vincent , Manhattan College
Current Institution: College of Mount Saint Vincent
EPA Project Officer: Savage, Nora
Project Period: June 27, 2003 through June 26, 2005 (Extended to June 26, 2006)
Project Amount: $389,391
RFA: Superfund Minority Institutions Program: Hazardous Substance Research (2002)
Research Category: Hazardous Waste/Remediation

Description:

Objective:

The purpose of the research project is to test the applicability of the Equilibrium Partitioning (EqP) method for developing sediment quality criteria for arsenic in sediments. Arsenic in aquatic sediments is currently a significant problem at Superfund sites. Based on a query of the EPA Superfund database, there are 142 Superfund sites on the current National Priority List (NPL) list with arsenic contamination in sediments. It is of critical importance, therefore, to have reliable methods for determining the sediment concentrations at which arsenic poses an environmental risk. The EqP method relates the observed toxicity of a chemical in the sediment to the concentration of that chemical in the pore water of the sediment. Thus, the LC50 concentration CLC50– the concentration that causes 50% mortality in the amphipod Leptocheirus plumulosus - will be established using water only exposures. The pore water concentration CPWwill be measured using a diffusion sampler. According to the predictions of the EqP model, we expect that if CPW< CLC50, that is, if the measured pore water concentration is less than the LC50 concentration determined from the water only exposures, then no mortality should be observed.

Approach:

We will test the equilibrium-partitioning model for arsenic via three approaches: (1) 96-h static renewal toxicity tests to determine water-only LC50’s for the marine amphipod Leptocheirus, (2) Microtox screening assays for potential chemical interactions with sulfide compounds, and (3) 10-d spiked sediment tests under oxic and anoxic conditions.

Expected Results:

Arsenic in aquatic sediments is currently a significant problem at Superfund sites. It is of critical importance, therefore, to have reliable methods for determining the sediment concentrations at which arsenic poses an environmental risk. We expect that the Equilibrium Partitioning (EqP) method will reliably predict the quality criteria for arsenite and arsenate anions in sediments. The EqP method will relate the observed toxicity of a chemical in sediment to the concentration of that chemical in the pore water of the sediment. Thus, we will provide EPA with a methodology to set rational and causal criteria for arsenic at Superfund sites.

Publications and Presentations:

Publications have been submitted on this project: View all 17 publications for this project

Supplemental Keywords:

sediments, risk assessment, bioavailability, metals

, POLLUTANTS/TOXICS, Water, Scientific Discipline, Waste, Health, RFA, Arsenic, Risk Assessments, Water Pollutants, Environmental Chemistry, Contaminated Sediments, Geochemistry, arsenic mobility, water quality, superfund site, arsenic exposure, risk management, reservoir sediments, bioaccumulation, ecology assessment models, Superfund sites, sediment quality survey, contaminated sediment, EqP, contaminant transport, equilibrium partitioning, sediment transport, biogeochemistry, water treatment

Progress and Final Reports:
2003 Progress Report
2004 Progress Report
Final Report

Top of page

The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.


Local Navigation


Jump to main content.