Checkai Ron, Van Genderen Eric, Sousa José Paulo, Stephenson Gladys, Smolders Erik
US Army Edgewood Chemical Biological Center, Environmental Toxicology Branch, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, USA.
Integr Environ Assess Manag. 2014 Jul;10(3):346-57. doi: 10.1002/ieam.1528. Epub 2014 May 5.
Soil contaminant concentration limits for the protection of terrestrial plants and soil invertebrates are commonly based on thresholds derived using data from laboratory ecotoxicity tests. A comprehensive assessment has been made for the derivation of ecological soil screening levels (Eco-SSL) in the United States; however, these limits are conservative because of their focus on high bioavailability scenarios. Here, we explain and evaluate approaches to soil limit derivation taken by 4 jurisdictions, 2 of which allow for correction of data for factors affecting bioavailability among soils, and between spiked and field-contaminated soils (Registration Evaluation Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals [REACH] Regulation, European Union [EU], and the National Environment Protection Council [NEPC], Australia). Scientifically advanced features from these methods have been integrated into a newly developed method for deriving soil clean-up values (SCVs) within the context of site-specific baseline ecological risk assessment. Resulting site-specific SCVs that account for bioavailability may permit a greater residual concentration in soil when compared to generic screening limit concentrations (e.g., Eco-SSL), while still affording acceptable protection. Two choices for selecting the level of protection are compared (i.e., allowing higher effect levels per species, or allowing a higher percentile of species that are potentially unprotected). Implementation of this new method is presented for the jurisdiction of the United States, with a focus on metal and metalloid contaminants; however, the new method can be used in any jurisdiction. A case study for molybdate shows the large effect of bioavailability corrections and smaller effects of protection level choices when deriving SCVs.
保护陆生植物和土壤无脊椎动物的土壤污染物浓度限值通常基于实验室生态毒性测试数据得出的阈值。美国已对生态土壤筛选水平(Eco-SSL)的推导进行了全面评估;然而,这些限值较为保守,因为它们侧重于高生物有效性情景。在此,我们解释并评估了4个司法管辖区推导土壤限值的方法,其中2个司法管辖区允许针对影响土壤间生物有效性以及加标土壤和现场污染土壤间生物有效性的因素对数据进行校正(欧盟化学品注册、评估、授权和限制法规[REACH]以及澳大利亚国家环境保护委员会[NEPC])。这些方法的科学先进特性已被整合到一种新开发的方法中,用于在特定场地基线生态风险评估背景下推导土壤清理值(SCV)。与通用筛选限值浓度(如Eco-SSL)相比,考虑生物有效性的特定场地SCV可能允许土壤中存在更高的残留浓度,同时仍能提供可接受的保护。比较了选择保护水平的两种方式(即允许每个物种有更高的效应水平,或允许有更高百分比的潜在未受保护物种)。本文介绍了这种新方法在美国司法管辖区的实施情况,重点是金属和类金属污染物;然而,这种新方法可用于任何司法管辖区。钼酸盐的案例研究表明,在推导SCV时,生物有效性校正的影响较大,而保护水平选择的影响较小。