1 / 6

Water Quality Criteria: Implications for Testing

Water Quality Criteria: Implications for Testing. Russell Erickson U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Mid-Continent Ecology Division, Duluth, MN, USA. The McKim Conference on the Use of QSARs and Aquatic Toxicology in Risk Assessment June 27-29, 2006.

lazaro
Download Presentation

Water Quality Criteria: Implications for Testing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Water Quality Criteria:Implications for Testing Russell Erickson U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Mid-Continent Ecology Division, Duluth, MN, USA The McKim Conference on the Use of QSARs and Aquatic Toxicology in Risk Assessment June 27-29, 2006

  2. U.S.EPA Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Life • Aquatic Life Criteria (ALC) issued by the U.S.EPA Office of Water define limits on chemical exposures which are considered sufficient to preclude unacceptable effects on aquatic communities. • Procedures are described in “Guidelines for Deriving Numerical National Water Quality Criteria for the Protection of Aquatic Organisms and Their Uses” (Stephan et al., 1985, U.S.EPA). • Used in regulatory programs to limit discharge of toxic chemicals, in evaluations of aquatic resource condition from monitoring data, and in setting clean-up goals for Superfund sites and other assessments.

  3. U.S.EPA Aquatic Life CriteriaAcute Toxicity Data Use • 48- or 96-hr LC50s are required for at least eight aquatic animal species encompassing a specified range of taxa. • Mean LC50s for tested species & genera are designated “Species/Genus Mean Acute Values” (SMAVs, GMAVs). • The “Final Acute Value” (FAV) is set equal to the fifth percentile of GMAVs, or a SMAV of an important species. • The “Criterion Maximum Concentration” (CMC) is set equal to one-half of the FAV. • 1-hr average exposure concentrations are allowed to exceed the CMC only once in three years on average.

  4. U.S.EPA Aquatic Life CriteriaChronic Toxicity Data Use • “Chronic values” (CV) are set to the EC20 or the mean of the NOEC&LOEC for the most sensitive of survival, growth, or reproductive endpoints from tests with minimum duration of several days to a few months, depending on species. • The “Final Chronic Value” (FCV) is set equal to the fifth percentile of GMCVs for at least eight animal genera, the FAV divided by the average SMAV:SMCV ratio for at least three species, or an SMCV of an important species. • The “Criterion Continuous Concentration” (CCC) is set equal to the FCV or a value based on plant toxicity data. • 4-day average exposure concentrations are allowed to exceed the CCC only once in three years on average.

  5. U.S.EPA Aquatic Life CriteriaTest Data Issues • Although minimum acute toxicity data requirements are limited, most chemicals do not meet these requirements. • For chemicals barely meeting minimum acute toxicity data requirements, important taxa might not be addressed. • For chronic toxicity, important response endpoints as well as important taxa might not be addressed. • Testing requirements do not reflect different modes-of-action among chemicals. • Protection of endangered/threatened species must be based on extrapolations from tested species.

  6. U.S.EPA Aquatic Life CriteriaBenefits from Predictive Toxicity Tools • QSARs for point estimates or lower bounds of effect concentrations for species and endpoints of interest. • Extrapolation tools for relative effect concentration differences among chemicals, species, and endpoints. • Methods to predict toxicity mechanisms for different taxonomic groups to guide acute and chronic testing strategies.

More Related