42021-12-10 12:14:00.0000003UTCpublished1678dc254-5c06-11ec-b4b8-000c29acbd522021-12-13 12:18:31.0000003UTCengdocumentsDocumentsgeneralDocuments/articles/4/documents4engdocumentsDocuments2021-12-13 12:18:31.0000003UTC4hun2021-12-13 12:18:31.0000003UTC2list19d1e093e-5bfe-11ec-b4b8-000c29acbd522021-12-13 11:22:45.0000003UTCPublicationspublications/publications/category/2/publications2engPublications2021-12-13 11:22:45.0000003UTC2hun2021-12-13 11:22:45.0000003UTC22filedocuments/publications/SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL FOR HSS.pdfapplication/pdf63 µm) (Lin et al., 2003). According to Horowitz
(1991) the sediment fraction >63 μm should not be ignored in terms of its
contribution to the amount of heavy metal concentrations in the sample even
though the concentration of trace elements in the fraction <63 µm is signifi-
cantly higher.
High concentrations of trace elements associated with coarse sediment frac-
tions could have various origins: the agglomeration of smaller particles to
form coarser clusters, binding of the fine fractions to the surface of larger
particles, the presence of large grains from pre-existing rocks, coarser forms
created by binding high organic matter content and Fe/Mn content. Conse-
quently sediment monitoring using the <63 μm particles could omit signifi-
cant metal contributions from the 63 µm – 2 mm size fraction.
A r easonable solution might be to carry out a pre-sampling program to
study the physical characteristics of the sediment in a particular river in
terms of particle size to determine the best sediment fraction to sample. In
rivers where the collection of the < 63 μm fraction is difficult because of gravel
beds, the <2 mm fraction could be sampled and this fraction used for sedi-
ment analysis.
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 25 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
The coarser fraction of sediment is also important to the biota. Although the
<63 μm particle size fraction is where a ma jor food source for benthic organ-
isms occurs, the larger fraction is important as a habitat for sediment dwell-
ing organisms which are still exposed to contaminants.
Guidance Document No. 19 – Guidance on surface water chemical monitoring
under the Water F ramework Directive suggests the <63 μm fraction should
be analysed for metals and the 2 mm fraction of the sediment should be ana-
lysed for organic contaminants.
Guidance Document No. 25 states; „grain size is one of the most important fac-
tors controlling t he distribution of natural and anthropogenic components in
sediments, along with organic matter content” . Therefore, it is recommended
for the <63 μm fraction (the clay -silt fraction, widespread in monitoring).
Considering the different viewpoints and rec ommendations of the CIS Guid-
ance No. 19 and 25, the fraction <63 μm is an acceptable compromise for
monitoring programmes and is the recommendation of the SIMONA pro-
ject.
5.5. SAMPLE VOLUME
The collected sample volume should be sufficient to be preserved f or all anal-
yses, for quality control analyses and to prepare time -dependent composites
(for example, daily samples of sewage sludge could be used to produce a
composite for monthly analysis; ISO 5667 -15:2009). Additionally sample vol-
ume is dependent on the (expected) concentration of the HSs (for organic
micro -
pollutants the sample volume should be larger than for trace ele-
ments), the amount of the fine fraction where pollutants mostly accumulate,
sediment porosity and the required sample volume for archivi ng.
The precise calculation of sample volume is very hard to determine. Each
chemical analysis requires a specific amount of sediment (considering ade-
quate replicates and archive samples) and the required volume of sediment
per sample should be calculated prior to sample collection. The National Oce-
Page 26 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
anic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) commonly sample 7 -8 litres of
sediment at each sampling site for numerous measurement and chemical
analyses (Long et al., 1996). According to the EPA for the biological ,
toxicological, and physicochemical analyses performed on sediment samples
more than 10 litres of sediment from each site may be required (EPA, 2001).
The quantities of sediments that should be collected will depend on the anal-
yses to be undertaken. SIMO NA recommendation: generally, 1 kg of sedi-
ment from each sample site should be sufficient for the analysis of most con-
taminants (e.g., 350 g for organics, 50 g for metals and metalloids, 50 -200 g
for particle size and other physical properties). In additio n, 2-3 kg may be
required for bioaccumulation or toxicity testing, and these sediment samples
should be stored cold (but not frozen).
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 27 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
6. SAMPLING EQUIPMENT
The choice of sampling equipment depends on the type of sediment. There
are common rules and equipment for sediment sampling in general. It should
be noted, where the sampling device is made of metal, then abrasion and
chemical action, for example from sulphides and phosphates, may lead to
specific contamination. In cases where sample equipment made from plastics
is used, chemical residues may leach from the material into the sample, for
example dispersants, or chemicals from the sediment may adsorb onto the
plastics.
Quality control measures should be undertaken in full consultation with the
receivi
ng laboratory in order to establish the degree of influence of such ef-
fects on the survey results. Some study parameters (e.g. sulphides) may re-
quire to be maintained in an oxygen -free atmosphere. In such circumstances,
storage and handling under an inert gas atmosphere may be needed. If it is
necessary to maintain anaerobic conditions while handling samples, tools
such as a glove box should be used. For samples where measurements can be
affected by exposure to oxygen, analysis should be performed as quickl y as
possible (ISO 5667 -12:2017; ISO 5667 -17:2008).
Important rules:
All hand jewellery must be removed!
Smoking is not permitted!
All tools and containers must be free of contaminants!
Page 28 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
The following equipment will be necessary to ensure the proper sampling
procedures for all kinds of samples (stream/bottom, suspended and flood-
plain sediments):
GPS or tablet with maps or topographical maps for recording the geo-
graphical coordinates of the sample site;
Camera or tablet for the required field photos;
Permanent marker;
Polyethylene bags;
Strip -locks for the sample bags;
Devices for sampling: stainless steel shovels or scoops (according to DIN
4188 -1 (1977);
Corer;
Stainless steel sieve set (according to DIN 4188 -1 (1977) with two prefer-
ably wooden or pla stic frames containing nylon 2.0 mm mesh and nylon
63 μm mesh screens;
Metal free plastic buckets, bottles or containers with lids;
Plastic or heavy -duty cardboard boxes for packing samples;
Nitrile gloves;
Equipment for in situ measurement (pH, temperatur e, electrical conduc-
tivity , transparency according to the standard ISO 7027:2001 );
Field observation sheets - printed or on the SIMONA IT tool tablet/phone.
Sampling the stream/bottom sediments at shallow water depths could be
performed by an operator directly entering the water on foot and using a
scoop to collect sediment. During sampling caution must be exercised in or-
der to not to mix different layers of sediment (ISO 5667 -12:2017).
According to ISO 5667 -12:2017, bottom sediments in deep w ater could be
sampled by corer or grab system. Core samples are more suitable for moni-
toring purposes since they do not disturb the sediment layer and it is possible
to take single samples (subsamples) to prepare one composite sample from
the same depth. T he detailed description of the corer systems is given in the
norm ISO 5667 -12:2017.
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 29 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
Sampling equipment for suspended sediments should be in accordance with
the norm ISO 5667 -17:2008 for Water quality – Sampling – Part 17: Guidance
on the sampling of bulk suspended solids. Different sampling equipment
could be used depending on the situation:
The continuous -flow centrifuge types include three types of centrifugal
samplers multi -chamber, multi -disc, and single -chamber tubular bowls;
Sedimentation tank (stationary);
Sedimentation box (in situ);
Floating collector (BISAM);
Plate sediment trap;
Flask sediment trap.
Page 30 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 31 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
7. FIELD OBSE RVATION SHEET
The field observation sheet depends on the objectives of the sampling pro-
gramme (ISO 5667 -6:2014; ISO 5667 -12:2017). The objective of monitoring
is sampling at a specific location over time.
Samples should be labelled at the time of collecti on and before the collector
moves on to the next sampling site. The sample numbers (sample unique
identifier - ID) should be alphanumeric:
A two or three digit code identifying the country of origin;
A two -digit sample number;
A code identifying the sampl e type: BS for stream/bottom sediment and
SS suspended sediment.
Duplicate samples identified by the same sample number as the original
with an additional "D" at the end of the number.
Sample identification codes should be waterproof. A unique identifier with
the date, time and sample location should be labelled on the sample contain-
er.
In the field observation sheets each sample has to contain the following
information as a minimum (ISO 5667 -15:2009; ISO 5667 -6:2014):
To register the exact sampling point locations, the use of Global Position-
ing System (GPS) technology is recommended (ISO 5667 -12:2017);
The name of the river or stream or lake;
Information on sampling at specific locations (bridge, in stream, from the
bank) (ISO 5667 -6:2014);
A description and disposition of sample;
Page 32 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
Any other information as necessary (about transport, storage, …);
The pH, temperature, and electrical conductivity of the sample should be
measured on site and recorded;
The temperature of the cooling device for th e storage and transport of the
sample should be recorded if there are any deviations from standard pro-
tocols;
Anything noted by the operator that can have potentially influenced the
sample (e.g. dust in the air, fish spawning, nearby traffic, solid waste in
the river etc);
The name of the person who undertook the sampling;
The date of sampling.
The proposed field observation sheet for the SIMONA project is given in Ap-
pendix 3 .
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 33 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
8. WET –SIEVING IN THE FIELD
Wet-sieving immediately after sampling at 2 mm i s necessary to eliminate
detritus and benthic organisms and to avoid the degradation of organic mate-
rial that would then become part of the sediment sample. Further wet -sieving
procedures can be undertaken to separate the fine- grained silt + clay frac-
tions , <63 μm. Wet -sieving re -suspends the fine fraction bound to coarser
fractions in the sediment sample. Water from the sampling site should be
used for sieving as it reduces the risk of leaching or contamination. The fine
fraction remains after sieving depo sits in water. Water used for sieving
should be reused for sieving subsequent batches (OSPAR, 2018). The sieved
fine fraction should be homogenised. More detail about the sieving proce-
dures is described in the Sediment quality laboratory protocol for HSs i n the
framework of the SIMONA project.
Page 34 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 35 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
9. TRANSPORT
After sampling, all samples should be stored in plastics (e.g. PE (polyeth-
ylene), PTFE (polytetrafluoroethylene), PVC (polyvinyl chloride), PET (poly-
ethylene terephthalate)), glass or borosilicate gl ass (ISO 5667-15:2009).
The temperature of the sample, especially of the sludge samples, can influ-
ence the properties of the sample. Therefore, the initial temperature of the
sludge samples should be measured on site and recorded (ISO 5667 -
15:2009).
Sampl es stored in air -sealed transparent polypropylene bags or bottles
should be stored in a refrigerator at a temperature between 2°C and 8°C. If
the temperature of the refrigerator is not appropriate, the laboratory should
determine how this affects the sampl es and/or the results of the analyses
(ISO 5667 -15:2009).
According to the recommendation of Guidance No. 25, samples are trans-
ferred into dark glass bottles for organic analysis or into plastic bags or bot-
tles for trace element analysis. Sampling contain ers should be filled to the top
(minimal headspace) to reduce the likelihood of oxidation and loss of acid
volatile sulphide (AVS) during transport. Samples should be stored in a re-
frigerator (at about 4°C) and be transported as soon as possible to the lab ora-
tory.
If the monitoring programme requires analysis of the different sediment frac-
tions, the sample should be split using appropriate sieving techniques (ISO
5667 -12:2017; ISO 5667 -15:2009; OSPAR, 2018).
Page 36 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 37 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
10. QUALITY CONTROL
Appropriate Quality control (QC) measures assure the quality of the results.
QC techniques include training, calibration of the equipment and the record-
ing of data (ISO 5667-14). The field QC includes sampling of the quality con-
trol samples such as field duplicates, f ield replicates, and field blanks.
Collecting field duplicates is part of a comprehensive QC. These samples
should be collected at the same site and time, using the same sampling meth-
od and type of equipment. They should be sieved, transported and archived in
the same manner as the original samples. Field duplicates have to be col-
lected at 5 -10 % of randomly selected sampling points throughout in-
vestigated area. These samples are used to measure spatial variability with-
in the sampling area. An assessment o f the field variability is particularly im-
portant in monitoring programs when the sampling has to be repeated for a
number of years to detect any changes over a longer time period (Reimann et
al., 2008). The precision of field duplicates can be estimated a s those of the
analytical duplicates by the formula CV (%) = (SD / X) * 100, where CV is the
Coefficient of the Variation of the result; SD is the Standard Deviation and X is
the Mean.
Field replicate is a split of the previously collected sample. The col lected
sample should be homogenised and after mixing divided into two samples:
the original and its replicate. The replicate is using for assessing the sample
handling variability i.e. to determine sediment heterogeneity within a single
collected sample, to check sample preparation techniques, laboratory analyti-
Page 38 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
cal variability and comparison of different laboratory results. It is recom-
mended to sample 5 -10 % of the field replicates .
Field blanks are samples of uncontaminated silica sand sampled using the
same sampling equipment and processed as for the sediment sampling. The
field blank samples are used to indicate that the relevant concentration of HSs
have not entered the samples from the sampling equipment or during sample
processing or handling. Usually 5 % of the samples are blanks .
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 39 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
11. SAFETY
Safety should always be a priority. Sampling should be undertaken consider-
ing the safety factors influenced by weather conditions, local conditions and
experience of local tides and local safety regulations.
General safety precautions are given in ISO 5667 -1:2006 Water quality –
Sampling – Part 1: Guidance on the design of sampling programmes and sam-
pling techniques. They include precautions to avoi d inhalation and ingestion
of toxic gases and materials through the nose, mouth and skin. Staff responsi-
ble for carrying out sampling should be informed about safety measurements
according to the national and/or regional health and safety regulations.
Pre cautions due to climatic conditions include wearing life jackets and life-
lines before sampling from ice -covered waters, check the ice, and check un-
derwater breathing apparatus or other diving equipment. Equipment used for
sampling (boats or platforms) shou ld be stable, in good condition and appro-
priate signals should be given to commercial ships and fishing vessels.
Sampling from unsafe sites should be avoided or if this is not possible, sam-
pling should be conducted by a team not by a single person. Sampli ng from
bridges should be preferred then bank sampling. Safe access to sampling sites
in all weather conditions is crucial for monitoring (ISO 5667 -12:2017).
Page 40 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 41 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
12. REFERENCES
Albanese, S., De Vivo, B., Lima, A., Cicchella, D. 2007. Geochemical background
and baseline values of toxic elements in stream sediments of Campania
region (Italy). Journal of Geochemical Exploration 93, 21 -34.
Audry, S., Schäfer, J., Blanc, G., Jouanneau, J.- M. 2004. Fifty-year sedimentary
record of heavy meta l pollution (Cd, Zn, Cu, Pb) in the Lot River reservoirs
(France). Environmental Pollution 132, 413 -426.
DIN 4188 -1:1977 Screening surfaces, wire screens for test sieves, dimensions.
German Institute for Standardisation.
EC 2003. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Di- rective (2000/60/EC): Guidance Document No. 7. Monitoring under the
Water Framework Directive. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications
of the European Communities.
EC 2007. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Fr amework Di-
rective (2000/60/EC): Guidance Document No. 15 Guidance on Ground-
water Monitoring Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the Eu-
ropean Communities.
EC 2009. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Di- rective (2000/60/EC): Gu idance Document No. 19 Guidance on Surface
Water Chemical Monitoring under The Water Framework Directive Lux-
embourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
EC 2010. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Framework Di- rective (20 00/60/EC): Guidance Document No. 25 Guidance on chemical
monitoring of sediment and biota under the Water Framework Directive
Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communi-
ties.
EC 2018. Common Implementation Strategy for the Water Fr amework Di-
rective (2000/60/EC): Technical Guidance for deriving Environmental
Quality Standards, Guidance Document No. 27 Updated version 2018.
Page 42 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
EPA 2001. Methods for Collection, Storage and Manipulation of Sediments for
Chemical and Toxicological Analyses: Technical Manual. Office of Science
& Technology Office of Water U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC, USA 20460. 208 p.
Fabian, K., Reimann, C., de Caritat, P. 2017. Quantifying Diffuse Contamina- tion: Method and Application to Pb in Soil. Environmental Science & Tech-
nology 51 (12), 6719 -6726.
Fraunhofer Institute 2002. Towards the Derivation of Quality Standards for Priority Substances in the Context of the Water Framework Directive: Fi-
nal Report of the Study: Identification of Quality Stan dards for Priority
Substances in the Field of Water Policy. EAF(3) -06/06/FHI. Fraunhofer -
Institute Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology, Germany. 124p.
Hawkes, H.E., Webb, J.S. 1962. Geochemistry in Mineral Exploration. Harper & Row, New York.
Horowit z, A.J. 1991. A Primer on Sediment -Trace Element Chemistry, USA,
CRC Press; 2 ed., 136p.
ICPDR 2003. List of Priority Substances for the Danube River Basin. Interna- tional Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, 4p.
ICPDR 2018. Water Quality in t he Danube River Basin – 2016. In: Liska, I.
(Ed.) TNMN – Yearbook 2016. ICPDR – International Commission for the
Protection of the Danube River, Vienna, Austria, 61p.
ISO 5667 -1:2006 Water quality – Sampling – Part 1: Guidance on the design of
sampling pro grammes and sampling techniques. International Organiza-
tion for Standardization.
ISO 5667 -6:2014 Water quality – Sampling – Part 6: Guidance on sampling of
rivers and streams International Organization for Standardization.
ISO 5667 -12:2017 Water quality – Sampling – Part 12: Guidance on sampling
of bottom sediments from rivers, lakes and estuarine areas. International
Organization for Standardization.
ISO 5667 -15:2009 Water quality – Sampling – Part 15: Guidance on the
preservation and handling of sludge an d sediment samples (reviewed and
confirmed in 2015). International Organization for Standardization.
ISO 5667 -17:2008 Water quality – Sampling – Part 17: Guidance on sampling
of bulk suspended solids (reviewed and confirmed in 2017). International
Organiza tion for Standardization.
ISO 6107 -2:2006 Water quality — Vocabulary — Part 2. International Organ-
ization for Standardization.
ISO 7027 -1:2016 Water quality — Determination of turbidity — Part 1. Quan-
titative methods. International Organization for Standar dization.
SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
FOR HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN SURFACE WATERS
A stream of cooperation Page 43 | 45
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
Lin, J.G., Chen, S.Y., Su, C.R. 2003. Assessment of Sediment Toxicity by Metal
Speciation in Different Particle -Size Fractions of River Sediment. Water
Science and Technology 47, 233 -241.
Long, E.R., Robertson, A., Wolfe, D.A., Hameedi, J., Sloan e, G.M. 1996. Estimates
of the spatial extent of sediment toxicity in major U.S. estuaries. Environ-
mental Science and Technology 30, 3585 -3592.
OSPAR 2018. CEMP Guidelines for Monitoring Contaminants in Sediments (revised 2018). OSPAR Agreement 2002 –16, OS PAR Commission, 118 p.
Reimann, C., Garrett, R.G 2005: Geochemical background - Concept and reali-
ty. Science of the Total Environment, 350 (1 -3), 12 -27.
Reimann, C., Filzmoser, P., Garrett, R.G. 2005. Background and threshold: crit- ical comparison of methods of determination. Science of the Total Envi-
ronment 346, 1 -16.
Reimann, C., Filzmoser, P., Garrett, R.G., Dutter, R. 2008. Statistical Data Anal- ysis Explained. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, London. 343p.
Reimann, C., Fabian, K., Birke, M., Filzmoser, P., Demetriades, A., Negrel, P.,
Oorts, K., Matschullat, J., de Caritat, P., The GEMAS Project Team 2018.
GEMAS: Establishing geochemical background and threshold for 53 chem-
ical elements in European agricultural soil. Applied Geochemistry 8 (B)
302 -318.
Salmi nen, R. (Ed.), Batista, M.J., Bidovec, M. Demetriades, A., De Vivo. B., De
Vos, W., Duris, M., Gilucis, A., Gregorauskiene, V., Halamic, J., Heitzmann, P.,
Lima, A., Jordan, G., Klaver, G., Klein, P., Lis, J., Locutura, J., Marsina, K.,
Mazreku, A., O'Conn or, P.J., Olsson, S.Å., Ottesen, R. -T., Petersell, V., Plant,
J.A., Reeder, S., Salpeteur, I., Sandström, H., Siewers, U., Steenfelt, A., Tar-
vainen, T. 2005. Geochemical Atlas of Europe. Part 1 – Background Infor-
mation, Methodology and Maps. Geological Sur vey of Finland, Espoo, Fin-
land, 526p. http://www.gtk.fi/publ/foregsatlas/).
Page 44 | 45 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
SIMONA
CONTACT DETAILS
Contact to project leader partner:
Geological Survey of Slovenia, Department for Mineral
Resources and Environmental Geochemistry
Dimiceva ulica 14, SI -1000 Ljubljana
Tel: +386 (0)1 2809 764 | Fax: +386 (0)1 2809 753
www.geo -zs.si
P roject manager : Jasminka Alijagic, SI -GEOZS
Mob: +386 51 208 693 | jasminka.alij agic@geo-zs.si
Scientific coordinator: Gyozo Jordan, HU -SZIE
Mob: +36 30 728 4060 | gyozojordan@gmail.com
Contact to author: Ajka Šorša , HR -HGI -CGS
Tel: +385 1 6160 739 | ajka.sorsa@hgi -cgs.hr
OTHER INFORMATION
Project title:
Sediment -quality Information, Monitoring and Assessment
System to support transnational cooperation for joint Danube
Basin water management (SIMONA)
Partnership of the project SIMONA:
The SIMONA partnership has 17 full partners (11 ERDF, 4 IPA
and 2 ENI) a nd 12 associated partners (ASPs) from 13 Coun-
tries, which is a balanced and strong representation of almost
the whole Danube River Basin.
Project duration:
01/06/2018 - 31/05/2021
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
For further information on the project, partnership and
the Danube Transnational Programme:
www.interreg -danube.eu/simona
FIND SIMONA PROTOCOLS ON THE WEBSITE!
For further information on the SIMONA Sampling ,
Laboratory and Evaluation protocols; on the project,
partnership and the Danube Transnational Programme:
www.interreg - danube.eu/simona
Page 1 | 5 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SIMONA PROJECT:
MONITORING ACTIVE FLOODPLAIN SEDIMENT
Authors: Sebastian Pfleiderer (AT-GBA), Ajka Šorša (HR -HGI-CGS),
Milena Vetseva (BG -GI -BAS)
APPENDIX 1 OF THE SIMONA SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
In various scientific studies of river systems and lakes, there are generally three types of sedi-
ments that can be distinguished: stream/bottom, floodplain and suspended. The deposition of
floodplain sediments in a fluvial environment takes place outside the river bed during overbank
flows. For practical purposes fluvial deposits can be divided into three major groups (Reineck and
Singh, 1980):
Channel deposits - formed mainly from the activity of river channels. They include channel
lag, point bar, channel bar, and channel fill deposits.
Bank deposits - sediments formed on the river banks and produced during flood periods. They
include levee and crevasse splay deposits.
Flood basin deposits - essentially fine -grained sediment layers formed during heavy floods
when river water flows over the levees into the flood basin. They include flood basin and
marsh deposits.
In some rivers, however, differentiation between bank and flood basin deposits does not exist,
and thus fluvial sediments can be differentiated into t wo groups: (1) Channel deposits and (2)
Floodplain deposits (Reineck and Singh, 1980).
Generally, floodplain could be considered as the relatively flat area of land that stretches from the
banks of the parent stream to the base of the valley walls and over which water from the river
channels flows at times of high discharge (Goudie, 2006). Floodplains are a characteristic trait of
the mature and old stages of a river as opposed to the young stage that occurs in the mountainous
regions (Reineck and Singh, 1 980).
The fine -grained fraction (silt and clay) is transported by rivers as suspended matter, the amount
and concentration of which directly depends on the density and size of the grains and water ve-
locity. Indirectly, it depends on the rock and soil type and erosion rates. The concentration of sus-
pended sediments varies with changes in the current profile and velocity.
Upstream sections are typically regions with high water velocities and consequently high erosion
rates so that the natural composition of the suspended sediment in rivers directly reflects the li-
thology in the catchment area.
For further information on the SIMONA Sampling ,
Laboratory and Evaluation protocols; on the project,
partnership and the Danube Transnational Programme:
www.interreg - danube.eu/simona
Page 2 | 5 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
Downstream in lowland river basins with large catchment areas, the natural composition of the
suspended sediment still reflects the parent material but the influenc e of individual lithologies
can be distinguished less clearly. In both upstream and downstream areas, the concentrations of
the HSs in the sediment can be overprinted by anthropogenic input.
River floodplains act as sediment sinks for alluvial deposits. W hile they are being stored the sedi-
ments may be reworked by fluvial, aeolian, biological and/or pedogenic agents. The stored sedi-
ments may subsequently be eroded and re- incorporated into the deposit budget of the drainage
basin. Because of the protracted r esidence times of heavy metals within rivers and their flood-
plains, metal- contaminated sediments may act as major sources of future contamination (Goudie,
2006). These characteristics, the relative ease of access and straightaway methods for sampling,
make floodplain sediments a suitable media for monitoring the river's environmental status.
Due to the varying frequency of flooding events, defining the extent of a floodplain in a given flu-
vial system as the area inundated during floods could be problematic. Wolman and Leopold
(1957) defined the term “active floodplain” as the area subjected to the annual flood (i.e. the
highest discharge each year). Though this definition could be a subject of discussion, in terms of
monitoring a river’s environmental status, defining the active and former floodplains (river ter-
races) is of high importance. The floodplain sediments suitable for monitoring are deposits
of suspended material onto active, regularly flooded floodplains and levees along rivers
with variable water flow.
The sediments deposited in the natural levees and the cr evasse splays could be monitored and
would present more realistic results about the quality of the water body, than marsh and flood
basin sediments. The latter two sub -environments could be used for monitoring purposes with
the precondition of sampling soon after the flooding event.
Other reasonable deposits for sediment monitoring are the silty and clayey layers on the top of
the point bars. Despite point bars being part of the channel deposits, these top sections are often
hard to distinguish from the lev ee deposits. This and their fine-grained nature make them a suit-
able sink and subsequently sampling media for HSs in river systems.
The background value for a given area could be defined either from earlier geological and geo-
chemical investigations or by sampling sediments that date from pre -industrial times. For the
floodplain sediment, the local background value should be defined as a geochemical composition
of the deeper, natural, preindustrial fluvial sediments at the sampling site. The surficial flood plain
is normally affected by recent anthropogenic activities and may be contaminated. Deeper samples,
which are optional sampling media, normally show the natural background variation (Šajn et al.,
2011). Thus, for floodplain sampling, it is advisable to determine background values at the sam-
pling site by sampling the deeper pre -industrial level of the river bank. The reliable assessment of
the drainage basin contamination could be performed by comparing pre - and post -industrial
floodplain sediments.
For further information on the SIMONA Sampling ,
Laboratory and Evaluation protocols; on the project,
partnership and the Danube Transnational Programme:
www.interreg - danube.eu/simona
Page 3 | 5 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
In summary, the analysis of the HSs in floodplain sediments will reflect natural background values
and historical contamination, while the regular monitoring in bottom sediment will show baseline
values and more recent contamination. The analysis of suspended s ediment (especially during
high flow events), as well as the occasional analysis of floodplain sediments (i.e. the deposits of
the last major flood event), will reveal the current state of contamination including material from
soil erosion.
The selection of the sediment sampling stations should follow the FOREGS Atlas recommen-
dations (Salminen et al., 2005). The field manual for the FOREGS Atlas suggests sampling of flood-
plain sediment from the lowermost point of the larger drainage basin (area 1,000 – 6,0 00 km
2) to
which the small catchments are connected (Salminen et al., 2005).
Furthermore, when choosing floodplain sediments for monitoring media, fluvial sub -environ-
ments suitable for the purposes should be very carefully determined. For example, the app roach
of Reineck and Singh (1980) that combines bank and overbank deposits into the "floodplain" en-
vironment seems more appropriate for monitoring goals.
Additionally, some further criteria should be applied when choosing a sampling site for floodplain
sed iments:
Distance from the river bed – closer to the river channel should be preferred to minimize the
effect or chemical overprint of external agents;
Frequency of flooding – sites with frequent flood events (for example annual) are preferable;
Localities, where floodplains are used for agriculture or near the field from which surface wa-
ters gravitationally flow to the site should be avoided;
Sites, where there is a possibility of strong air pollution should be avoided;
Having in mind the ability of differe nt plant species to extract certain chemical elements from
the soils, habitat, where vegetation is missing or is scarce are preferable then thickly vegetated
ones.
Composite samples for floodplain sediment should be comprised of 5 - 10 subsamples.
The prescribed sampling depth for floodplain sediments in the FOREGS Atlas is 0 – 25cm
(Salminen et al., 2005). This provides a comprehensive indication of the recent state of contami-
nation. However, the accumulated floodplain sediments record (historical) contamination within
the drainage basin over time. The separate sampling of individual flood events (e.g. the pre -indus-
trial level (once) and the latest flood event (occasionally)) is preferable and the results are more
meaningful. In this case, sampling depth and thickness depend on the deposition rate . Geo-
logical experience is necessary to identify the sediment layer (depth interval) to be sampled.
For further information on the SIMONA Sampling ,
Laboratory and Evaluation protocols; on the project,
partnership and the Danube Transnational Programme:
www.interreg - danube.eu/simona
Page 4 | 5 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
The frequency for floodplain sediment monitoring is for discussion. Bearing in mind that the
multitude of processes, besides fluvial, that rework these sediments could overall alter the river’s
chemical print, sampling should be performed soon after flood event, at least annually . The
time(s) of a year should be defined locally based on annual water regime.
Furthermore, the susceptibility of floodplain sediments to be altered by non -fluvial processes, an
appropriate approach could be more frequent monitoring at shallower depths (for example, sed-
iment that represent the last flood event or the top 5 cm). This will secure the obtaining of more
reliable results for the changes in the environmental status. Such higher frequency, however,
could be well reasoned after a sufficient amount of data from sediment monitoring has been ac-
cumulated.
Another approach is choo sing longer intervals for floodplain sediments monitoring. The fre-
quency of monitoring for floodplain sediment could be once every six years , which complies
with the six -year cycles suggested by the WFD directives.
The analysed size fraction for floodpla in sediment samples in the FOREGS Atlas is <2 mm, the
SIMONA Sediment quality sampling protocol for HSs prescribes the <63 μm fraction (Šorša, The
SIMONA Project Team, 2019). Both fractions of floodplain sediment (0 – 63 μm and 63 μm –
2 mm) are recommende d for analysis.
In the Field observation sheet in the SIMONA Sediment quality sampling protocol for the HSs,
there is a field "Others" where information about the floodplain sediment could be entered (Šorša,
The SIMONA Project Team, 2019, Appendix 3).
Th e sample volume, sample equipment, and other sample preparation procedures should
be in accordance with the FOREGS Atlas (Salminen, 2005).
The description of the field Quality control (QC) is presented in the SIMONA Sediment quality
sampling protocol for the HSs (Šorša, The SIMONA Project Team, 2019).
SIMONA recommendation: The appropriate monitoring of the HSs in river sediments
should take into account all types of the sediment: stream/bottom, floodplain and sus-
pended sediments to comprehensively invest igate the sediment-associated HSs.
For further information on the SIMONA Sampling ,
Laboratory and Evaluation protocols; on the project,
partnership and the Danube Transnational Programme:
www.interreg - danube.eu/simona
Page 5 | 5 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
REFERENCES
Goudie, A. S. 2006. Encyclopedia of Geomorphology Vol. 1. Taylor & Francis e- Library, 1202p.
Reineck , H-E., I. B. Singh. 1980. Depositional Sedimentary Environments: with reference to terri-
genous clastics. Springer -Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. 565p.
Salminen, R. (Ed.), Batista, M.J., Bidovec, M. Demetriades, A., De Vivo. B., De Vos, W., Duris, M., Gilu- cis, A., Gregorauskiene, V., Halamic, J., Heitzmann, P., Lima, A., Jordan, G., Klaver, G., Klein, P., Lis,
J., Locutura, J., Marsina, K., Mazreku, A., O'Connor, P.J., Olsson, S.Å., Ottesen, R. -T., Petersell, V.,
Plant, J.A., Reeder, S., Salpeteur, I., Sandström , H., Siewers, U., Steenfelt, A., Tarvainen, T. 2005.
Geochemical Atlas of Europe. Part 1 – Background Information, Methodology and Maps. Geo-
logical Survey of Finland, Espoo, Finland, 526p. http://www.gtk.fi/publ/foregsatlas/).
Šajn, R., Halamić, J., Peh, Z., Galović, L. & Alijagić, J. 2011. Assessment of the natural and anthropo-
genic sources of chemical elements in alluvial soils from the Drava River using multivariate
statistical methods. - Journal of Geochemical Exploration, 110/3, 278 -289.
Šorša, A., The SIMONA Project Team. 2019. Sediment quality sampling protocol for HSs. EU Inter- reg Danube Transnational P rogramme. 45p.
Wolman, M.G., L.B. Leopold. 1957. River floodplains: some observations on their formation. US Geological Survey Professional Paper 28 2C, 87–107.
For further information on the SIMONA Samp ling,
Laboratory and Evaluation protocols; on the project,
partnership and the Danube Transnational Programme:
www.interreg- danube.eu/simona
Page 1 | 1 A stream of cooperation
Project co-funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
LIST OF PRIORITY SUBSTANCES AND DANUBE RIVER BASIN SPECIFIC POLLUTANTS
APPENDIX 2 OF THE SIMONA SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
List of priority substances (PS) in the field of water policy (Part A, Annex I; Directive 2013/39/EU)
Number in
PS directive
WISE -SoE code
(CAS/EEA)
number 1
Name of priority substance
1 2 CAS_120 -12 -7 Anthracene
2 5 EEA_32 -04 -2 Brominated diphenylethers
(congener numbers 28, 47, 99, 100, 153 and 154)
3 6 CAS_7440 -43 -9 Cadmium and its compounds
4 7 CAS_85535 -84 -8 C10 -13 -chloroalkanes
5 12 CAS_ 117 -81 -7 Di(2 -ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP)
6 15 CAS_206 -44 -0 Fluoranthene
7 16 CAS_118 -74 -1 Hexachlorobenzene
8 17 CAS_87 -68 -3 Hexachlorobutadiene
9 18 CAS_608 -73 -1 Hexachlorocyclohexane
10 20 CAS_7439 -92 -1 Lead and its compounds
11 21 CAS_7439 -97 -6 Mercury and compounds
12 23 CAS_ 7440 -02 -0 Nickel and its compounds
13 26 CAS_608 -93 -5 Pentachlorobenzene
14 28 EEA_33 -56 -7
Total PAHs (Benzo(a)pyrene, Benzo(b)fluoranthene,
Benzo(k)fluoranthene, Benzo(g,h,i)perylene,
Indeno(1,2,3 -cd)pyrene)
15 30 CAS_36643 -28 -4 Tributyltin -cation
16 34 CAS_ 115 -32 -2 Dicofol
17 35 CAS_ 1763 -23 -1 Perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and its derivatives (PFOS)
18 36 CAS_ 124495 -18 -7 Quinoxyfen
19 37 EEA_33 -58 -9 Dioxins and dioxin -like compounds (7 PCDDs + 10
PCDFs + 12 PCB -DLs)
20 43 EEA_33 -57 -8 Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCDD)
21 44 EEA_33 -50 -1 Heptachlor and heptachlor epoxide
List of River Basin Specific Pollutants for the Danube River Basin (ICPDR, 2003)
CAS number 1 Name of Substance
22 CAS_ 7440 -38 -2 Arsenic and its compounds
23 CAS_ 7440 -50 -8 Copper and its compounds
24 CAS_ 7440 -66 -6 Zinc and its compounds
25 CAS_ 7440 -47 -3 Chromium and its compounds
1 WISE -SoE: European Environment Information and Observation Network reporting systems ; CAS:
Chemical Abstracts Service ; EEA: European Environment Agency registration number (if CAS is not
acceptable)
For further information on the SIMONA Sampling ,
Laboratory and Evaluation protocols ; on the project,
partnership and the Danube Transnational Programme:
www.interreg -danube.eu/simona
Page 1 | 2 A stream of cooperation
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
FIELD OBSERVATION SHEET FOR SEDIMENT SAMPLING
APPENDIX 3 OF THE SIMONA SEDIMENT QUALITY SAMPLING PROTOCOL
MONITORING PROGRAMME/ SAMPLING PROJECT INFORMATION:
Project name: Sample identifier (ID):
Collection date (DD/MM/YYYY): Collection time (HH:MM):
Sampling matrix : □ stream/ bottom sediment; □ suspended sediment; □ other (floodplain sediment, …) :
Sampling: □ accredited; □ not accredited S
ampling standard:
MONITORING SITE IDENTIFICATION:
Monitoring Site ID (WISE-SoE): Monitoring Site ID (national):
Name of the Monitoring Site (e.g. name of the surface water and the city) :
Sample location description with specific information (bridge, high power electric lines, railway line,
major road, natural park, …) (provide map on opposite side):
Type of the monitoring site (can be different from representing waterbody): □ river; □ lake; □ wetland;
? other ( floodplain , …):
Aim of sampling: □ general status; □ reference site (without/small anthropogenic sources);
□ investigation site – find contamination source; □ investigation site for other:
WGS84 Latitude:
National
Coordinate system
Latitude:
Longitude: Longitude:
MONITORING SITE REPRESENTING THE FOLLOWING WATERBODY AND ITS BASIN:
Is it the same waterbody as the Monitoring Site has? □ YES or □ NO
If no, describe the connection between waterbody and monitoring site (tributary, recipient, …) :
Waterbody ID (WISE -SoE): Waterbody ID (national):
Name of the Waterbody:
Type of the Waterbody: □ river; □ lake; □ wetland; □ coastal; □ transitional
MONITORING SITE CONDITIONS ( PART I):
River width [m]:
□ estimated; □ measured value
Depth of water estimated
average depth [m]:
Flow rate [m/s]:
□ estimated; □ measured value
Water temperature [°C]: Water electrical conductivity [µs/cm]:
Water pH:
Water transparency (Secchi disk method) [cm]:
Geology and background value of parent material/lithology in the area:
For further information on the SIMONA Sampling ,
Laboratory and Evaluation protocols ; on the project,
partnership and the Danube Transnational Programme:
www.interreg -danube.eu/simona
Page 2 | 2 A stream of cooperation
Project co -funded by the European Union (ERDF, IPA and ENI)
MONITORING SITE CONDITIONS (PART II):
Extreme conditions: □ none; □ flooding status; □ ice; □ pollution plume; □ contaminated coast/bank;
□ other:
Weather conditions: □ hot; □ sunny; □ cloudy; □ changeable; □ rainy; □ frosty
SEDIMENT COLLECTION INFORMATION:
Water depth above sample [m]:
Sediment sample depth [cm]:
Collection device: □ s tainless steel scoop; □ c orer; □ s ampler for
suspended sediment;
□ o ther:
Sample type: □ c omposite – n umber of subsamples: ______
Distance between the first and last sampling site ? [m] :
Sample replicate collected? □ YES or □ NO Replicate ID/name:
Sample is duplicate d? □ YES or □ NO
SAMPLE INFORMATION:
Sampling volume estimated, wet weight [liter]:
Temperature of sample (field observation, right after sampling) [°C]:
Sediment pH (undisturbed): Sediment pH (post-homogenization):
Colour (Munsell soil colour chart number):
Texture (particle size description):
Odour: □ none ; □ light ; □ strong ;
□ earthy ; □ mildewed ; □ putrid; □ farm slurry ; □ fishy ; □aromatic ; □ sewage ; □ fuel/oil
Information on sediment components (seashells, animals, peat, wood, tar, stones, waste, plastics, etc.):
Sample photograph identification:
Additional comments (e.g. map of the sampling site) :
Sampler name (readable): Signature:
Water depth above sample [m]
Sediment sample depth [cm]
Water surface
Stream bottom]]>f219b25a-f4ef-43e5-9403-b9a3f17c79dc1018144a3-5bff-11ec-b4b8-000c29acbd521Developer User2021-12-13 11:56:38.0000003UTCSediment quality sampling protocol for hazardous substances in surface watersFluvial systems can be strongly influenced by human activity, acting as and/or the carrier of pollutants, becoming a source of pollution if environ- mental conditions change. The transport of potentially toxic elements (PTEs) and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) depends on topography, the oxic- anoxic conditions and kinetics of the sorption/desorption processes. Moreo- ver, pH, salinity, and the presence of organic matter, clay minerals, sulphates, and carbonates also affect metal mobility in the sediments (bottom and stream sediments, suspended matter sediment, floodplain sediment). Sedi- ments provide detailed information on the historical record of pollution in a watershed, and if the PTEs and POPs are attached to stored alluvium, it can turn them from being a sink to a source of pollutants for the sediment inter- face, bioturbation and resuspension during dredging or flooding (Audry et al., 2004).
]]>Publications/publications/category/2/publications/publications/file/2/sediment-quality-sampling-protocol-for-hazardous-substances-in-surface-watersengsediment-quality-sampling-protocol-for-hazardous-substances-in-surface-waters2engSediment quality sampling protocol for hazardous substances in surface watersFluvial systems can be strongly influenced by human activity, acting as and/or the carrier of pollutants, becoming a source of pollution if environ- mental conditions change. The transport of potentially toxic elements (PTEs) and persistent organic pollutants (POPs) depends on topography, the oxic- anoxic conditions and kinetics of the sorption/desorption processes. Moreo- ver, pH, salinity, and the presence of organic matter, clay minerals, sulphates, and carbonates also affect metal mobility in the sediments (bottom and stream sediments, suspended matter sediment, floodplain sediment). Sedi- ments provide detailed information on the historical record of pollution in a watershed, and if the PTEs and POPs are attached to stored alluvium, it can turn them from being a sink to a source of pollutants for the sediment inter- face, bioturbation and resuspension during dredging or flooding (Audry et al., 2004).
]]>2021-12-13 11:25:34.0000003UTC2hun2021-12-13 11:25:34.0000003UTC