Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 110, Issue 1–3, pp 257–270 | Cite as

Evaluation of Lead Availability in Amended Soils Monitored Over a Long-Term Time Period



Two different soil amendment processes were evaluated for reducing lead availability from a contaminated soil at a demonstration study site, to reduce potential public health and environmental concerns. A limited variety of in vitro laboratory “availability” tests (relative bioaccessible and environmental mobility) were performed to determine if the available lead in the contaminated soil would be less available after in situ soil amendment (chemical treatment). The relative bioaccessibility results were evaluated in both a short-term period (within 24 h after treatment) and over a long-term time period (quarterly basis for 5 years).

Reduction in relative bioaccessibility was noted for one of the treatments immediately after treatment; however, both treatments indicated a significant upward trend in bioaccessibility values over a 5-year time period after treatment. The comparison between the treated units and the control units indicated that the long-term effectiveness of the treatment processes could not be demonstrated.


bioavailability leaching lead soil 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. American Academy of Environmental Engineers: 1994, in W. Anderson (ed), Innovative Site Remediation Technology: Solidification/Stabilization, Vol. 4, Annapolis, MD.Google Scholar
  2. Badamchian, B., Klich, I. and Hubbard, J.: 1991, ‘Evaluation of Long-term Effectiveness of Solidified and Stabilized Wastes’, in: Proceedings of 1991 Hazardous Materials Control Research Institute Association Conference, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  3. Burgoon, D., Rust, S. and Hogan, K.: 1995, Relationship Among Lead Levels in Blood, Dust, and Soil. Lead Poisoning: Exposure/Abatement/Regulation, Lewis Publishers, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 255–264.Google Scholar
  4. Butler, S., Barth, E. and Barich, J.: 1996, Field Quality Control Strategies for Assessing Solidification/ Stabilization. Stabilization/Solidification of Hazardous, Radioactive, and Mixed Waste, Vol. 3, ASTM STP 1240, W. Conshohocken, PA, pp. 685–690.Google Scholar
  5. Chen, X., Wright, J., Conca, J. and Peurrung, L.: 1997, ‘Evaluation of heavy metal remediation using mineral apatite’, Water Air Soil Pollut. 98.Google Scholar
  6. Conner, J.: 1990, Chemical Fixation and Solidification of Hazardous Wastes, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY.Google Scholar
  7. dePercin, P. and Sawyer, S.: 1991, ‘Long-term monitoring of the hazcon stabilization process at the Douglassville, Pennsylvania superfund site’, J. Air Waste Manage. 41(1), 88–91.Google Scholar
  8. Hettiarachchi, G., Pierzynski, G. and Ransom, M.: 2001, ‘In situ stabilization of soil using phosphorus’, J. Environ. Qual. 30(4), 1214–1221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ma, Q., Traina, S. and Logan, T.: 1993, ‘In situ lead immobilization by apatite’, Environ. Sci. Technol. 27(9), 1803–1810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Maddolini, M., Lolacono, N., Manton, W., Blum, C., Drexler, J. and Graziano, J.: 1998, ‘Bioavailability of soilborne lead in adults, by stable isotope dilution’, Environ. Health Perspec. 106(Suppl. 6), 1589–1595.Google Scholar
  11. Perry, J., Prange, J. and Garvey, W.: 1992, ‘Long-term Leaching Performance for Commercially Stabilized Waste’, in T. Gilliam and C. Wiles (eds), Stabilization and Solidification of Hazardous, Radioactive, and Mixed Waste, Vol. 2, ASTM STP 1123, American Society for Testing and Materials, W. Conshocken, PA, pp. 243–251.Google Scholar
  12. Ruby, M., Davis, A., Schoof, R., Eberle, S. and Sellstone, C.: 1996, ‘Estimation of bioavailability using a physiologically based extraction test’, Environ. Sci. Technol. 30, 420–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. SRBC: 1998, In Vitro Method for Determination of Lead and Arsenic Bioaccessibility, Revision No. 5, February.Google Scholar
  14. USEPA: 1998, Testing Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical Chemical Methods, SW-846, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  15. USEPA: 1991, Guidance on Oversight of PRP Remedial Investigations/Feasibility Studies, OSWER Directive No. 9835, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Edwin F. Barth
    • 1
  • Paul A. Succop
    • 2
  • Mark L. Evans
    • 3
  1. 1.National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and DevelopmentUnited States Environmental Protection AgencyCincinnatiU.S.A.
  2. 2.Department of Environmental Health, Medical CollegeUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiU.S.A.
  3. 3.Environmental Scientist, Tetra Tech Environmental Management Inc.RestonU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations