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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Part B, Section 7 data, the Median Effects Method (MEM) (see Section 7.5.2.4) is preferable for guidelines derivation due to expected lower levels of uncertainty. Derivation Procedure The 25th percentile of the frequency distribution was chosen to represent the "no potential effects range" (NPER) based on the analysis of data from cadmium, pentachlorophenol, and arsenic. The NPER represents a point estimate in the distribution below which the proportion of definitive effects data (EC X , LC X ) do not exceed "acceptable levels" (25%). Definitive effects data below the NPER are "minimal effects concentrations" that overlap the range of LOECs and NOECs used to determine the NPER. Norenberg-King (1988) used a 25% effect level as an estimate of the minimal effect level. Due to the variability inherent in LOEC data and its proximity to NOEC estimates on distribution curves (often overlapping NOEC points [see Figure 11]), it is not considered a definitive effect, but rather as a potential effect estimate. The TEC is calculated using the following equation: TEC = NPER/UF where TEC = threshold effects concentration (mg/kg) NPER = no potential effects range (25th percentile of distribution) (mg/kg) UF = uncertainty factor (if needed) An uncertainty factor can be applied after examining the data used to estimate the NPER. A UF between one and five is suggested using the criteria below as a guide to determine the magnitude of the uncertainty if: • only the minimum of three studies is available. • more than three studies are available, but fewer than three taxonomic groups are represented. • more than 25% of the data below the 25th percentile are definitive effects data. It should be noted that an uncertainty factor need not always be applied. Expert judgement should determine the magnitude of the uncertainty factor based on the above criteria. An uncertainty factor greater than five for other sources of uncertainty (e.g., field extrapolation) is not recommended since the point of departure for the NPER is considered conservative and accounts for these and other (e.g., model error) uncertainties. The TEC should now be compared with the microbial value to determine the SQC SC for agricultural and residential/parkland land uses (see Appendix A). 54
Part B, Section 7 7.5.2.3 Lowest Observed Effect Concentration Method. When the minimum data requirements for the weight of evidence method cannot be met, the TEC is derived by extrapolating from the lowest available, lowest observed effect concentration (LOEC) divided by an uncertainty factor (if needed). In this method, the TEC is estimated to be somewhere below the lowest reported effect concentration (see Figure 9). The TEC is calculated using the following equation. TEC = lowest LOEC/UF where TEC = threshold effects concentration (mg/kg soil) LOEC = lowest observed effect concentration (mg/kg soil) UF = uncertainty factor (if needed) A minimum of three studies reporting LOEC and NOEC endpoints must be considered. Requirements also include at least one terrestrial plant and one soil invertebrate study. If expert judgement determines that an UF is warranted, the following criteria should be used as a guide for application to determine an UF between one and five: • The LOEC is considered "biologically significant" and not just statistically different from controls, and therefore extrapolation below this level of effect is required. • The LOEC is taken from an acute lethal or sublethal study. • Only the minimum number of studies (three) was available to select the lowest LOEC. • Fewer than three taxonomic groups are represented when selecting the lowest LOEC. An uncertainty factor greater than five for other levels of uncertainty (e.g., model error, intra-species variation) is not recommended since a large measure of conservatism is already added by selecting the species with the lowest available LOEC. The TEC should now be compared with the microbial value to determine the SQG SC for agricultural and residential/parkland land uses (see Appendix A). 7.5.2.4 Median Effects Method. Alternatively, if the minimum data requirements cannot be met for the weight of evidence and LOEC methods, the TEC is derived by extrapolating from the lowest available EC 50 or LC 50 datum using an uncertainty factor (UF). In this method, the TEC is estimated in the region of predominantly no effects (see Figure 11). The TEC is calculated as follows: TEC = lowest EC 50 or LC 50 /UF where TEC = threshold effects concentration (mg/kg soil) 55
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 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 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 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 and 234:
Appendix F Appendix F Multi-media E
Page 235 and 236:
Appendix F example, fish BCFs are t
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?