Advertisement

Water, Air, and Soil Pollution

, Volume 139, Issue 1–4, pp 159–182 | Cite as

Aquatic Hazard Assessment of a Contaminated Surficial Aquifer Discharge into the Bush River, Maryland (U.S.A.)

  • Dennis T. BurtonEmail author
  • Joseph L. DiLorenzo
  • Tommy R. Shedd
  • John G. Wrobel
Article

Abstract

An aquatic hazard assessment of contaminatedgroundwater in a surficial aquifer was conducted at Beach Pointwhich is located in the Edgewood Area of the U.S. Army Garrison,Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland. Toxicity was detected atvarious groundwater concentrations by seven of 10 toxicity testsystems exposed to a mixture of heavy metals and chlorinatedaliphatic hydrocarbons. When estimated maximum acceptabletoxicant concentrations (MATC) were established, the data foralgae, invertebrates, and fish suggested that the groundwaterwould not be harmful at a concentration of 10% groundwater byvolume. Likewise, no genotoxicity (Ames and SEC assays),development toxicity (FETAX), or chronic histopathology (9-monthfish test) occurred at 10% groundwater by volume.Near-field (ULINE model) and far-field (dye-tracer model)screening level dilution models were run to estimate the dilutionof the groundwater discharge plume from Beach Point into the BushRiver. The groundwater was considered to be a potentiallyexcessive hazardous material to the biota in the Bush River whena number of conservative assumptions regarding contaminantdistribution and discharge rate of the aquifer were used in thehazard assessment. By modeling the groundwater emanating fromBeach Point as the dilution of a discharge from a line diffuser,the potential water quality impacts were judged to be minimal ifState of Maryland surface water discharge criteria for a mixingzone were used for the discharge of groundwater to the Bush River.

cadmium chlorinated organics copper dichloroethene dye-tracer model groundwater hazard assessment heavy metals nickel tetrachloroethane tetrachloroethene toxicity trichloroethene ULINE model water quality zinc 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ames, B. N., Durston, W. E, Yamasaki, E. and Lee, F. D.: 1973, 'Carcinogens are mutagens: a single test system combining liver homogenate for activation and bacteria for detection', Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 70, 2281–2286.Google Scholar
  2. ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials): 1992, 'Standard Guide for Conducting the Frog Embryo Teratogenesis Assay-Xenopus (FETAX)', ASTM Designation E 1439-91, in 1992 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.04, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, U.S.A., pp. 1199–1209.Google Scholar
  3. ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials): 1998, 'Standard Guide for Assessing the Hazard of a Material to Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses', ASTM Designation E 1023-84 (Reapproved 1996), in 1998 Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 11.05, American Society for Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA, U.S.A., pp. 344–359.Google Scholar
  4. Baumgartner, D. J., Frick, W. E. and Roberts, P. J. W.: 1994, Dilution Models for Effluent Discharges, 3rd ed., EPA/600/R94/086, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, New Port, OR, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  5. Bunton, T. E.: 1990, 'Hepatopathology of diethylnitrosamine in the medaka (Oryzias latipes) following short-term exposure', Toxicol. Pathol. 28, 313–323.Google Scholar
  6. Burton, D. T., Herriott, R. S. and Turley, S. D.: 1994, 'Biomonitoring and Hazard Assessment of Con-taminated Groundwater at Aberdeen Proving Ground-Edgewood Area Beach Point Peninsula', AD A289063, Defense Technical Information Center, Alexandria, VA, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  7. Carter, H. H.: 1976, 'Simple One Dimensional Kinematic Model Results for the Bush River and Romney Creek', Special Report 49, Johns Hopkins University Chesapeake Bay Institute, Baltimore, MD, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  8. Cohen, R. M. and Mercer, J. W.: 1993, DNAPL Site Evaluation, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  9. COMAR (Code of Maryland Regulation): 1996, Various Parts of the Code of Maryland Regulation, Maryland Department of the Environment, Baltimore, MD, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  10. Fisher, H. B., List, E. J., Koh, R. C. Y., Imberger, J. and Brooks, N. H.: 1979, Mixing in Inland and Coastal Waters, Academic Press, New York, NY, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  11. Hawkins, W. E., Overstreet, R. M. and Walker, W. W.: 1988, 'Small fish models for identifying carcinogens in the aqueous environment', Water Resour. Bull. 24, 941–949.Google Scholar
  12. Hawkins, W. E., Walker, W. W. and Overstreet, R. M.: 1995, 'Carcinogenicity Tests Using Aquarium Fish', in G. M. Rand (ed.), Fundamentals of Aquatic Toxicology Effects, Environmental Fate, and Risk Assessment, 2nd ed., Taylor & Francis, London, pp. 421–446.Google Scholar
  13. Herriott, R. S. and Burton, D. T.: 1992, 'U.S. Army Biomedical Research and Development Laboratory Aquatic Biomonitoring Trailer Version 1.0: Operations Manual', AD A260733, Defense Technical Information Center, Alexandria, VA, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  14. Howard, P. H. (ed.): 1989, Handbook of Environmental Fate and Exposure Data for Organic Chemicals, Vol. 1, Large Production and Priority Pollutants, Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, MI, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  15. Howard, P. H. (ed.): 1990, Handbook of Environmental Fate and Exposure Data for Organic Chemicals, Vol. 2, Solvents, Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, MI, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  16. JEG (Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.): 1993, 'Beach Point Test Site Aberdeen Proving Ground–Edgewood Area, Maryland Focused Feasibility Study Final Project Work Plan', Master Agreement No. 071914-A-D7, Task Order No. 142133, Supplement No. 8, Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., Arlington, VA, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  17. JEG (Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc.): 1996, 'Final Beach Point Focused Feasibility Study', Army Distribution No. 1627-A-3, Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc., Arlington, VA, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  18. Klaunig, J. E., Barut, B. A. and Goldblatt, P. J.: 1984, 'Preliminary studies on the usefulness of medaka (Oryzias latipes) embryos in carcinogenicity testing', Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 65, 155–161.Google Scholar
  19. Knox, R. C., Sabatini, D. A. and Canter, L. W.: 1993, Subsurface Transport and Fate Processes, Lewis Publishers, Ann Arbor, MI, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  20. K-V Associates, Inc: 1994, Hydrogeologic Study of Beach Point, Edgewood Area Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Maryland, Proj. No. 1016, K-V Associates, Inc., Falmouth, MA, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  21. Lauren, D. J., Teh, S. J. and Hinton, D. E.: 1990, 'Cytotoxicity phase of diethylnitrosamine-induced hepatic neoplasia in medaka', Cancer Res. 50, 5504–5514.Google Scholar
  22. Lorah, M. M. and Clark, J. S.: 1996, Contamination of Ground Water, Surface Water, and Soil, and Evaluation of Selected Groundwater Pumping Alternatives in the Canal Creek Area of Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, 95-282, U.S. Geological Survey, Towson, MD, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  23. Lorah, M. M. and Vroblesky, D. A.: 1989, Inorganic and Organic Ground-Water Chemistry in the Canal Creek Area of Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, 89-4002, U.S. Geological Survey, Towson, MD, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  24. Mackay, D., Shiu, W. Y. and Ma, K. C.: 1993, Illustrated Handbook of Physical-Chemical Properties and Environmental Fate for Organic Chemicals, Vol. III, Volatile Organic Chemicals,Lewis Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  25. Marking, L. L.: 1985, 'Toxicity of Chemical Mixtures', in G. M. Rand and S. R. Petrocelli (eds), Fundamentals of Aquatic Toxicology, Hemisphere Publishing Corp., New York, NY, U.S.A., pp.164–176.Google Scholar
  26. McGinnis, L. D., Daudt, C. R., Thompson, M. D., Miller, S. F., Mandell, W. A. and Wrobel, J.: 1994, 'Environmental Geophysics at Beach Point Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland', ANL/ESD-23, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  27. Metcalfe, C. D.: 1989, 'Tests for Predicting Carcinogenicity in Fish', Rev. Aquatic Sci. 1, 111–129.Google Scholar
  28. Muellenhoff, W. P., Soldate, A. M., Baumgartner, D. J., Schuldt, M. D., Davis, L. R. and Frick, W. E.: 1985, Initial Mixing Characteristics of Municipal Ocean Discharges: Vol. 2, Procedures and Applications, EPA 600/3-85-073a, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Narragansett, RI, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  29. Nemeth, G.: 1989, RCRA Facility Assessment Report Edgewood Area Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, 39-26-0490-90, U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  30. Oliveros, J. P. and Vroblesky, D. A.: 1989, Hydrogeology of the Canal Creek Area, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, 89-4021, U.S. Geological Survey, Towson, MD, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  31. Perry, P. E. and Evans, H. J.: 1975, 'Cytological detection of mutagens/carcinogens exposure by sister chromatid exchange', Nature 258, 121–125.Google Scholar
  32. Pritchard, D. W.: 1976, 'Distribution of Contaminants and Excess Heat in the Bush River and Romney Creek from the Proposed Perryman Electric Power Plant', Special Report 58, Johns Hopkins University Chesapeake Bay Institute, Baltimore, MD, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  33. Roberts, P. J. W., Snyder, W. H. and Baumgartner, D. J.: 1989, 'Effect of diffuser design on submerged wastefield', ASCE J. Hydraulic Eng. 115, 49–71.Google Scholar
  34. Tetra Tech: 1982, Revised Section 301(h) Technical Support Document, 430/9-82-011, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  35. Thurston, R. V., Russo, R. C. and Emerson, K.: 1979, Aqueous Ammonia Equilibrium-Tabulation of Percent Ionized Ammonia, EPA-600/3-79-091, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Duluth, MN, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  36. Twerdok, L. E., Burton, D. T., Gardner, H. S., Shedd, T. R. and Wolfe, M. J.: 1997, 'The use of nontraditional assays in an integrated environmental assessment of contaminated ground water', Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 16, 1816–1820.Google Scholar
  37. UNESCO: 2000, 'Report on the Proposal for the Establishment of an International Groundwater Resources Assessment Centre (IGRAC) under the Auspices of UNESCO and WMO', IHP/IC-XIV/ Inf. 26, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, International Hydrological Programme, 14th Session of the Intergovernmental Council, Paris, 5–20 June 2000.Google Scholar
  38. U.S. EPA: 1974, Safe Drinking Water Act, 42 U.S.C. s/s 300f et seq.Google Scholar
  39. U.S. EPA: 1980a, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. s/s 9601 et seq.Google Scholar
  40. U.S. EPA: 1980b, Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Chlorinated Ethanes, EPA 440/5-80-029, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  41. U.S. EPA: 1985, Water Quality Assessment: A Screening Procedure for Toxic and Conventional Pollutants, EPA/600/6-85/002b, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Athens, GA, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  42. U.S. EPA: 1986, The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.Google Scholar
  43. U.S. EPA: 1988a, Chemical Characteristics of Streams in the Mid-Atlantic and Southeastern United States (National Stream Survey-Phase 1), EPA/600/3-88/021b, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  44. U.S. EPA: 1988b, Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Aluminum – 1988, EPA 440/5-86-008, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  45. U.S. EPA: 1991a, Technical Support Document for Water Quality-Based Toxics Control, EPA/505/2-90-001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  46. U.S. EPA: 1991b, Evaluation of Dredged Material Proposed for Ocean Disposal, EPA-503/8-91/001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  47. U.S. EPA: 1991c, Assessment and Control of Bioconcentratable Contaminants in Surface Waters, 1991 Draft Report, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  48. U.S. EPA: 1993a, Technical Basis for Deriving Sediment Quality Criteria for Nonionic Organic Contaminants for the Protection of Benthic Organisms by Using Equilibrium Partitioning,EPA-822-R-93-011, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  49. U.S. EPA: 1993b, Water Quality Standards Handbook, 2nd ed.,EPA-823-B-93-002, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  50. U.S. EPA: 1995, Stay of Federal Water Quality Criteria for Metals; Water Quality Standards; Establishment of Numeric Criteria for Priority Toxic Pollutants; States' Compliance-Revision of Metals Criteria; Final Rules, 40 C.F.R. §131.Google Scholar
  51. U.S. EPA: 1999, National Recommended Water Quality Criteria-Correction, EPA 822-Z-99-001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  52. Weber, C. I. (ed.): 1991, Methods for Measuring the Acute Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater and Marine Organisms, 4th ed., EPA/600/4-90/027, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  53. Weber, C. I., Peltier, W. H., Norberg-King, T. J., Horning II, W. B., Kessler, F. A., Menkedick, J. R., Neiheisel, T. W., Lewis, P. A., Klemm, D. J., Pickering, Q. H., Robinson, E. L., Lazorchak, J. M., Wymer, L. J. and Freyberg, R. W.: 1989, Short-Term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to Freshwater Organisms, 2nd ed., EPA/600/4-89/001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, U.S.A.Google Scholar
  54. Williamson, R. L., Burton, D. T., Clarke, J. H. and Fleming, L. E.: 1993, 'Gathering danger: the urgent need to regulate toxic substances that can bioaccumulate', Ecol. Law Quart. 20, 605–720.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dennis T. Burton
    • 1
    Email author
  • Joseph L. DiLorenzo
    • 2
  • Tommy R. Shedd
    • 3
  • John G. Wrobel
    • 4
  1. 1.Wye Research and Education CenterUniversity of MarylandQueenstownU.S.A.
  2. 2.Najarian AssociatesEatontownU.S.A
  3. 3.U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, U.S. Army Center for Environmental Health ResearchFrederickU.S.A
  4. 4.U.S. Army Aberdeen Proving Ground, Directorate of Safety, Health and EnvironmentU.S.A

Personalised recommendations