Protocol for the Derivation of Environmental and Human ... - CCME

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Appendix F A. Data Collection: Data on concentrations in air, water, soil, food, consumer products are combined with information on the rate of contact with air, water, and food to estimate exposure. Alternately, data on the concentrations in human tissues (i.e., hair, blood, urine, fat) can be combined with pharmacokinetic data to predict exposure rates. When no residue data is available because concentrations in the medium are below detection limit, the current detection limit will estimate the concentration in that medium. This would constitute a maximum value. B. Determination of Intake: Receptors are classified into five groups based on age (i.e., newborn to 6 months, 7 months to 4 years, 5 to 11 years, 12 to 19 years, 20 years plus). In this document, the term child describes any individual up to 11 years of age. For each particular receptor group, quantities of air breathed, or water, food, and soils ingested, and surface area of exposed skin are required to convert a concentration in a contaminated medium (such as air or food) to a dose. Some basic assumptions routinely made about Canadians in risk assessments can be found in the CCME working document "Review and Evaluation of Receptor Characteristics for Multimedia Assessments". Figures for daily food consumption patterns in Canada by age group are available within the Health Protection Branch. Once data on the level of contamination are known for these foods, it is then possible to estimate the daily dose that these age classes might experience. C. Determination of Retention and Absorption: It is often assumed that 100% of the dose ingested, inhaled or applied to the skin is bioavailable. However, where possible, more precise data on actual retention and absorption is used to make the assessments as accurate as possible. D. Identification of Sensitive Receptors: It is important to attempt to identify individuals (receptors) who may be at greater risk from exposure to a substance or at greater risk due to increased sensitivity to toxic effects. For example, the fetus and newborn are at greater risk to mercury and lead due to the sensitivity of the developing neurological system. Often, data do not exist to permit the precise quantification of exposure. However, it may be known or suspected that the substance is present in the environment and some indication of exposure and risk is needed. In these cases, it is common to use predictive models to estimate levels in environmental media. Environmental fate and partitioning models have been developed to predict relative concentrations in water, soil, air and foods. These models rely on regression equations or other mathematical relationships which can predict environmental partitioning from simple chemical characteristics such as water solubility, octanol/water partition coefficients, Henry's Law Constant, and organic carbon partition coefficient. Rates of physical, chemical and biological degradability can also be predicted by some models. Different models have been developed for different purposes. Environmental partitioning models are based on the assumption of chemical equilibrium between all media. However, deterministic models are required if one wants to predict the concentration of a substance at some specified distance from a point source of contamination. These models exist to assess chemicals released from incinerator stacks and from spills into soil or groundwater. In foods, simple bioaccumulation or biomagnification factors were established for many chemicals. These will give a simplistic indication of the likelihood that a chemical will build up in fish, game or domestic animals and the approximate ratio of concentrations in the food to that in the environment. For 158
Appendix F example, fish BCFs are the ratio of the concentration in the fish (usually the flesh) to that in the water in which it was reared. Plant BCFs are the ratio of the concentration in the plant to that in the soil in which it was grown. 159
Page 1 and 2:
A Protocol for the Derivation of En
Page 3 and 4:
Readers' Comments The Canadian Coun
Page 5 and 6:
Overview In response to growing pub
Page 7 and 8:
mechanisms for migration of soil co
Page 9 and 10:
procédures d'élaboration des reco
Page 11 and 12:
• être absorbés par les plantes
Page 13 and 14:
PART B Section 1 Derivation of Envi
Page 16 and 17:
Section 2 Investigation of Contamin
Page 18 and 19:
PART D Section 1 Derivation of the
Page 20 and 21:
List of Figures 1 National Framewor
Page 22 and 23:
Acknowledgements The CCME Subcommit
Page 24 and 25:
Document Organization This document
Page 26 and 27:
Bioaccumulation: The process by whi
Page 28 and 29:
Denitrification: The gaseous loss o
Page 30 and 31:
GGG Guidelines: Generic numerical l
Page 32 and 33:
Mutagenicity: The ability of a chem
Page 34 and 35:
xxxiv human exposure. Risk estimati
Page 36 and 37:
Soil: Normally defined as the uncon
Page 38 and 39:
VVV Volatilization: The chemical pr
Page 41 and 42:
Section 1 The National Contaminated
Page 44 and 45:
Part A, Section 1 6
Page 46 and 47:
Part A, Section 1 1.2.2.2 Remediati
Page 48 and 49:
Part A, Section 1 of, and establish
Page 50 and 51:
Part A, Section 2 Section 2 Nationa
Page 53 and 54:
Part A, Section 2 2.2 Limitations o
Page 55 and 56:
Part A, Section 2 17
Page 57 and 58:
Part A, Section 2 Industrial: where
Page 59 and 60:
• the sensitivity of the test con
Page 61:
Part A, Section 3 23
Page 64 and 65:
Section 2 Level of Ecological Prote
Page 66 and 67:
Part B, Section 2 2.3 Endpoint Defi
Page 68 and 69:
Part B, Section 2 There is consiste
Page 70 and 71:
Part B, Section 4 Section 4 Potenti
Page 72:
Part B, Section 4 Figure 4 Simplifi
Page 75 and 76:
Figure 5 Key Receptors and Exposure
Page 77 and 78:
Part B, Section 5 grazing herbivore
Page 80 and 81:
Part B, Section 5 5.2.2 Maintenance
Page 82 and 83:
Part B, Section 5 5.4 Industrial La
Page 84 and 85:
Section 6 Uncertainty in Guidelines
Page 86 and 87:
Section 7 Guidelines Derivation Pro
Page 88 and 89:
Part B, Section 7 (SQG SG = soil qu
Page 90 and 91:
Part B, Section 7 a soil quality gu
Page 92 and 93:
Where: NPER = no to Potential Effec
Page 94 and 95:
Part B, Section 7 7.5.2.1 Using Mic
Page 96 and 97:
Part B, Section 7 data, the Median
Page 98 and 99:
Part B, Section 7 EC 50 LC 50 UF =
Page 100 and 101:
Where: ERL = Effects Range Low, ECL
Page 102:
Part B, Section 7 Where: EC 50 = Me
Page 105 and 106:
Part B, Section 7 Where the ECL lie
Page 107 and 108:
Part B, Section 7 4. Fewer than thr
Page 110 and 111:
Part B, Section 7 An uncertainty fa
Page 112 and 113:
Part B, Section 7 Therefore, BCF =
Page 114 and 115:
Part B, Section 7 ingestion (SQG I
Page 117 and 118:
Section 8 Derivation of the Final E
Page 119 and 120:
Part C, Section 1 65
Page 121 and 122:
Part C, Section 1 various sites acr
Page 123 and 124:
Part C, Section 1 Geographical unce
Page 125 and 126:
preferred for the assessment, but s
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Part C, Section 2 Environmental con
Page 131 and 132:
Part C, Section 2 extent, the steep
Page 133 and 134:
Section 3 Exposure to Contaminants
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Part C, Section 4 Section 4 Exposur
Page 139 and 140:
Part C, Section 4 within limits, th
Page 141 and 142:
Part C, Section 4 Figure 19 Concept
Page 143 and 144:
Part C, Section 4 4.2 Absorption of
Page 145 and 146:
Part C, Section 4 In the case of no
Page 148 and 149:
Residential/Parkland Land Use Sensi
Page 150 and 151:
Part C, Section 4 Commercial Land U
Page 152:
Part C, Section 4 Industrial Land U
Page 155 and 156:
Part C, Section 5 these data are av
Page 157 and 158:
Part C, Section 5 GEOCHEM (Mattigod
Page 159 and 160:
Part C, Section 5 • K oc (sorptio
Page 161 and 162:
Part C, Section 5 5.3.3 Evaluation
Page 163 and 164:
Part C, Section 5 parameters, and s
Page 165 and 166:
Section 6 Derivation of the Final H
Page 167 and 168:
Part D, Section 1 101
Page 169 and 170:
does not apply to the commercial or
Page 171:
Part D, Section 1 105
Page 174 and 175:
References Aldenberg, T., and W. Sl
Page 176 and 177:
References -dwelling Organisms", Ab
Page 178 and 179:
References 112
Page 180 and 181:
References Hill, E.F., and D.J. Hof
Page 182 and 183:
References Paustenbach, D.J., (1989
Page 184 and 185: References Summers, J.K., H.T. Wils
Page 186 and 187: Appendix A Appendix A Nutrient and
Page 188 and 189: Appendix A Figure A.1 Simplified Te
Page 190 and 191: Appendix A 4.1 Agricultural and Res
Page 192 and 193: Appendix A References Bååth, E.,
Page 194 and 195: The Subcommittee considers that exp
Page 196 and 197: Appendix B P l P r BW = percent pro
Page 198 and 199: Appendix B Substituting equation 5
Page 200 and 201: Appendix B Where no MRL exists, the
Page 202 and 203: Appendix B Then, the remainder (T R
Page 204 and 205: Appendix B For carcinogens, total i
Page 206 and 207: Appendix C Rearranging [2] and subs
Page 208 and 209: Appendix C References Chiou, C.T.,
Page 210 and 211: Appendix D uncontaminated organic m
Page 212 and 213: Appendix D R = recharge, m/yr A = a
Page 214 and 215: Appendix D 2.3.3 Hydraulic Gradient
Page 216 and 217: Appendix D 2.3.5 Site Length The le
Page 218 and 219: Appendix D Table D.2 Lower Quantile
Page 220 and 221: Figure D.2 Conceptual Model of Dilu
Page 222: Appendix D Figure D.3 Recharge Esti
Page 225 and 226: Appendix D 159
Page 227 and 228: Smith, A.E., P.B. Ryan, and J.S. Ev
Page 229 and 230: Appendix E C K L V is the climate f
Page 231 and 232: Appendix E contaminant concentratio
Page 233: Appendix F Appendix F Multi-media E
Page 237 and 238: Appendix G 2.2 Contaminant Vapour T
Page 239 and 240: Appendix G Table G.1 Equations Used
Page 241 and 242: Appendix G at the outset that, rath
Page 243 and 244: Appendix G 4.4 Application of the R
Page 245 and 246: Average outdoor summer temperature
Page 247: Appendix G References Alberta Envir
show all

Protocol for the Derivation of Environmental and Human ... - CCME

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?